1 Nov
2001
1 Nov
'01
7:20 a.m.
Here's some ammo for the anti-Intel folks...
--- David A Woyciesjes
--- C & IS Support Specialist
--- Yale University Press
--- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu
--- (203) 432-0953
--- ICQ # - 905818
! -----Original Message-----
! From: Grant Bechler [mailto:GrantB@plaid.com]
! Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:35 PM
! To: AlphaNT Mailing List
! Subject: [alphant] Intel's dependent on the Alpha chip (From the
! inquirer)
!
!
! Howdy All,
!
! I thought that Aaron would get a kick out of this article
!
! http://213.219.40.69/01110105.htm
!
! "WE WONDERED WHY DOUG BUSCH, the IT manager at Intel, went
! all coy on us
! yesterday when we asked about the systems running in its factories
! (fabrication plants) and a little bit of investigation has
! revealed the
! answer.
! Its fabs are heavily dependent on Alpha microprocessors and
! run OpenVMS to
! ensure that blue screens of death or glitches in its own
! chips don't bring
! the production lines down..."
1 Nov
1 Nov
7:37 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 01:20:35PM -0500, David Woyciesjes wrote:
Sure.. that has been the case for a long time. Intel Ireland ran
OpenVMS CI-clusters, might date back to the VAX days.
If you want the utmost in stability (and you do want that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
Wilko
Here's some ammo for the anti-Intel folks...
--- David A Woyciesjes
--- C & IS Support Specialist
--- Yale University Press
--- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu
--- (203) 432-0953
--- ICQ # - 905818
! -----Original Message-----
! From: Grant Bechler [mailto:GrantB@plaid.com]
! Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:35 PM
! To: AlphaNT Mailing List
! Subject: [alphant] Intel's dependent on the Alpha chip (From the
! inquirer)
!
!
! Howdy All,
!
! I thought that Aaron would get a kick out of this article
!
! http://213.219.40.69/01110105.htm
!
! "WE WONDERED WHY DOUG BUSCH, the IT manager at Intel, went
! all coy on us
! yesterday when we asked about the systems running in its factories
! (fabrication plants) and a little bit of investigation has
! revealed the
! answer.
! Its fabs are heavily dependent on Alpha microprocessors and
! run OpenVMS to
! ensure that blue screens of death or glitches in its own
! chips don't bring
! the production lines down..."
---end of quoted text---
--
| / o / /_ _ email: wilko(a)FreeBSD.org
|/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, The Netherlands
7:43 a.m.
If you want the utmost in stability (and you do want
that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
us UNIX weenie wave our uptime numbers around at each other, VMS people don't
do that. why? you install VMS, boot the machine, and expect it to run until
you take it offline. the pair of 6000 boxes at the one place i worked at ran
from the day they were installed, up until they were
removed from the facility
late last year. never shut down. not once. god i love
that stuff.
-brian
7:52 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 01:43:11PM -0500, Brian Hechinger wrote:
Yep.. ;) I'm a Unix weenie myself, but VMS sure beats it for stability.
--
| / o / /_ _ email: wilko(a)FreeBSD.org
|/|/ / / /( (_) Bulte Arnhem, The Netherlands
If you want
the utmost in stability (and you do want that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
us UNIX weenie wave our uptime numbers around at each other, VMS people don't
do that. why? you install VMS, boot the machine, and expect it to run until
you take it offline. the pair of 6000 boxes at the one place i worked at ran
from the day they were installed, up until they were removed from the facility
late last year. never shut down. not once. god i love that stuff. 
10:04 a.m.
Where I used to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model 80 that was installed
in a closet to do coordination of manufacturing equipment status and
utilization reports when it was new. It ran DOS. It was deinstalled in
May 2001. It had been running continuously without a crash, except for
losses of power, and that only happened twice in the same year, in 1992.
Peace... Sridhar
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Brian Hechinger wrote:
If you want
the utmost in stability (and you do want that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
us UNIX weenie wave our uptime numbers around at each other, VMS people don't
do that. why? you install VMS, boot the machine, and expect it to run until
you take it offline. the pair of 6000 boxes at the one place i worked at ran
from the day they were installed, up until they were removed from the facility
late last year. never shut down. not once. god i love that stuff.
-brian
10:05 a.m.
Where I used to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model 80
that was installed
in a closet to do coordination of manufacturing equipment status and
utilization reports when it was new. It ran DOS. It was deinstalled in
May 2001. It had been running continuously without a crash, except for
losses of power, and that only happened twice in the same year, in 1992.
i wouldn't doubt it, i used to run DOS on my 386 many moons ago, and it never
gave me any trouble. it's great. it's almost entirely useless for doing more
than one thing at a time. when you get to be that simple, stability is just
about given to you. but once you step up to large multiuser systems you have
all sorts of contention for the same resources that you don't have in a single
tasking environment. so yeah, i believe you are right. i'm not, however very
impressed. :)
why don't you start throwing mainframe data at us? mainframes run a lot like
the old vaxen, uptimes in the double digit years range.
-brian
7:03 p.m.
Where I used
to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model 80 that was installed
in a closet to do coordination of manufacturing equipment status and
utilization reports when it was new. It ran DOS. It was deinstalled in
May 2001. It had been running continuously without a crash, except for
losses of power, and that only happened twice in the same year, in 1992.
i wouldn't doubt it, i used to run DOS on my 386 many moons ago, and it never
gave me any trouble. it's great. it's almost entirely useless for doing more
10:18 a.m.
Please remove the port-alpha list from the upcoming follow-up posts.
It's just because this is not in any way related to NetBSD/alpha.
Everyone who likes to read this is participating on the Classiccmp list,
too (incl. me), and to this is not a problem.
Greetings - Freddy
--
Geek Code 3.1: GCS s+: a--- C+++ UBOU+++ P-- E--- W++ N w--- V++ PGP- t? 5? tv
==========================================================================
Frederik Meerwaldt Homepage: http://www.freddym.org
Bavaria/Germany JUST UPDATED!!! OpenVMS & Unix Howtos & more
Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, NetBSD, OpenBSD, IRIX, Tru64, OpenVMS, Ultrix, BeOS
2 Nov
2 Nov
4:06 a.m.
Where I used to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model 80
that was installed
in a closet to do coordination of manufacturing equipment status and
utilization reports when it was new. It ran DOS. It was deinstalled in
May 2001. It had been running continuously without a crash, except for
losses of power, and that only happened twice in the same year, in 1992.
I can't resist this one....(:+}}... I ran a Model 80 with AIX 1 from 1988
through 2000, with nary a burp, except for an HD that dived after about 5
years. Dang, them PS/2 Model 80's are indestructible, just like Olden
VAXentoyz.....(:+\\...... The machine in question is still running in my
basement, after I bought it from our surplus for 5 buckeroos, alongside
the MVII critters.....(:+}}....
Peace... Sridhar
Right On!
Good ol' Unixy Junque just trucks along, forever!
Bob
8:27 a.m.
> Where I used to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model
80 that was installed
I can't resist this one....(:+}}... I ran a Model
80 with AIX 1 from 1988
through 2000, with nary a burp, except for an HD that dived after about 5
The model 95 though is not only indestructible, its pretty, especially from
the back with the bronze internal case, very tech looking.
8:47 p.m.
Indeed. I have six running here identically configured with P90 Type-IV
complexes running Linux 2.4.10. A wall of identical pretty machines are
awesome, especially since they are strong enough to put a board across and
sit on. 8-)
Peace... Sridhar
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Mike Ford wrote:
> Where I
used to work, there was an IBM PS/2 model 80 that was installed
I can't resist this one....(:+}}... I ran a
Model 80 with AIX 1 from 1988
through 2000, with nary a burp, except for an HD that dived after about 5
The model 95 though is not only indestructible, its pretty, especially from
the back with the bronze internal case, very tech looking.
7:14 p.m.
On 02-Nov-2001 NetBSD Bob wrote:
I can't resist this one....(:+}}... I ran a Model
80 with AIX 1 from
1988 through 2000, with nary a burp, except for an HD that dived after
about 5 years.
What versions of AIX are supported on the Model 80? And where
would I
be able to get it :)
I have a model 80 that's just looking form some "game" to play on it.
-Philip
1 Nov
1 Nov
8:10 a.m.
If you want the utmost in stability (and you do want
that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
Last I heard, 90% of the worlds FAB's run on OpenVMS.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
10:05 a.m.
Maybe that applies only to Semiconductor FABs. A lot of other FABs run
OS/400, and still others run QNX.
Peace... Sridhar
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Zane H. Healy wrote:
If you want the
utmost in stability (and you do want that for a wafer fab)
VMS outdoes the competition (yes, also Unix competition!)
Last I heard, 90% of the worlds FAB's run on OpenVMS.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
8:35 a.m.
New subject: Was OT Re: OffTopic: Intel's dependent on the Alpha chip...
My Vaxstation 4000/60 was owned by Intel. Allways thought that was funny.
'-)
Regards,
Jeff
In
<9011A52E011ED311B4280004AC1BA615014671F4(a)yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu>du>,
on 11/01/01
at 01:20 PM, David Woyciesjes <DAW(a)yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu> said:
Here's some ammo for the anti-Intel folks...
--- David A Woyciesjes
--- C & IS Support Specialist
--- Yale University Press
--- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu
--- (203) 432-0953
--- ICQ # - 905818
! -----Original Message-----
! From: Grant Bechler [mailto:GrantB@plaid.com]
! Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 12:35 PM
! To: AlphaNT Mailing List
! Subject: [alphant] Intel's dependent on the Alpha chip (From the !
inquirer)
!
!
! Howdy All,
!
! I thought that Aaron would get a kick out of this article
!
! http://213.219.40.69/01110105.htm
!
! "WE WONDERED WHY DOUG BUSCH, the IT manager at Intel, went ! all coy
on us
! yesterday when we asked about the systems running in its factories !
(fabrication plants) and a little bit of investigation has ! revealed
the
! answer.
! Its fabs are heavily dependent on Alpha microprocessors and ! run
OpenVMS to
! ensure that blue screens of death or glitches in its own
! chips don't bring
! the production lines down..."
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey S. Worley
Asheville, NC USA
828-6984887
UberTechnoid(a)Home.com
-----------------------------------------------------------
8297
days inactive
8299
days old
14 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu -
frederik＠freddym.org -
gwynp＠artware.qc.ca -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
mikeford＠socal.rr.com -
nbsdbob＠weedcon1.cropsci.ncsu.edu -
UberTechnoid＠home.com -
vance＠ikickass.org -
wkb＠freebie.xs4all.nl -
wonko＠arkham.ws