| IDL on VMS?? [message #22383] |
Fri, 10 November 2000 00:00  |
Harvey Rarback
Messages: 24
Registered: September 1998
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Folks,
Is anybody else as upset as I am about Kodak's lack of support for OpenVMS
after
version 5.4? Considering the history of IDL on the platform and the still
large
number of scientists using VMS, it seems like a mistake to me.
Any suggestions for getting Kodak to reconsider?
--Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: IDL on VMS?? [message #22542 is a reply to message #22383] |
Wed, 15 November 2000 00:00  |
Joseph B. Gurman
Messages: 31
Registered: April 2000
|
Member |
|
|
In article <MPG.14760e1ef507058a989c78@news.frii.com>,
davidf@dfanning.com (David Fanning) wrote:
> Harvey Rarback (rarback@slac.stanford.edu) writes:
>
>> Is anybody else as upset as I am about Kodak's lack of support for
>> OpenVMS after
>> version 5.4? Considering the history of IDL on the platform and the
>> still large
>> number of scientists using VMS, it seems like a mistake to me.
>
> Well, at one time we were *all* on VMS. (Or, at least
> those of us with gray hairs were, Harvey.) But that's
> another sad story.
>
> How many OpenVMS new licenses do you suppose were
> sold last year? I'm sure it eventually gets to the
> point where the numbers don't even begin to justify
> the effort. I know nothing about the facts in this
> case, but I do know that in the past RSI has always
> gone WAY beyond when the numbers made sense before
> yanking a version.
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
I truly doubt the new licenses support IDL development, though they
certainly do give RSI a view of what platforms to concentrate on.
I'd be more interested in the revenue flow from maintenance
agreements per platform. In the interests of openness, I will divulge
that 5 of our 21 licenses are on OpenVMS platforms, including some with
unlimited, node-locked licenses (read "expensive to maintain").
Maintaining those licenses represents 35% of our ~ $14K annual
maintenance burden, and while I'm relieved to be able to do without it,
I wonder whether or not there are enough OpenVMS IDL licenses out there
with maintenance agreements to support one (or one-half full-time
equivalent) support programmer at RSI.
If I were to speculate, I'd guess the one OpenVMS guru/guruette has
decided not to work for Kodak but strike out for new work, and OVMS
applications programmers are getting harder to find each year....
outside of old folks' homes, that is. "Why, I remember our first VAX...."
None of which means we'll be dropping any OpenVMS machines anytime
soon, since as Bill Thompson pointed out, we use them for spacecraft
instrument ops, but it may mean we never buy another maintenance upgrade
to IDL again. $300 for tech support per year sounds about right. Hope
RSI is happy to lose our $13K of support business per year, since it
makes more sense to keep our unix, MAc, &c. machines running the same
version as our OVMS ones for compatibility, unless a specific new
feature makes it worthwhile to change (haven't seen many lately, but I'm
hoping for better AltiVec support in the Mac OS X version).
I'd like to thank David Stern and the RSI team for 20 years of
excellent product and support. It's been real.
Joe Gurman
--
| Joseph B. Gurman, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Solar Physics
| Branch, Greenbelt MD 20771 USA / Federal employees are still
| prohibited from holding opinions while at work. Therefore, any
| opinions expressed herein are somebody else's.
|
|
|
|
| Re: IDL on VMS?? [message #22736 is a reply to message #22383] |
Mon, 04 December 2000 00:00 |
Hugh Evans
Messages: 9
Registered: July 1996
|
Junior Member |
|
|
As a user of both IDL and PVWave (I choose which depending on what side of
the bed I wake up - and which license I can grab), I can recommend them
both. Although, porting from IDL -> Wave or Wave->IDL is becoming more and
more problematic as their functionality and syntax (in particular
structures) gradually diverge, a constant headache.
Unfortunately, we're slowly being booted off our OpenVMS machines to the
considerably less reliable (and from what I've seen slower) Sun Unix
machines. I wish just once that the standard for computing would err on the
technically excellent side instead of the lowest common denominator ( see
Mac vx Windows, VMS vs Unix, Unix vs. WNT, ADA vs C/C++) -- although there
is the exception to the rule (I'm becoming fond of Java).
Please do not reply to this, it is not intended as a trawl, or flame
generator, just my humble opinion which no-one has been able to provide a
reasonable argument to warrent any change (NOT to be taken as a challenge).
:-)
Regards,
Hugh
"Harold Stevens ** PLEASE SEE SIG **" <stevens@sp27.dseg.ti.com> wrote in
message news:xVRQ5.62$y23.1709@dfw-service2.ext.raytheon.com...
> In <3A13DFC0.4B83D7BE@def.com>, Laurie Finn:
>
> |> You could use PV-Wave (they still develop their OpenVMS versions)
>
> [Snip...]
>
> FWIW, I agree, and have found it an excellent graphical analysis
environment:
>
> http://www.vni.com/products/wave/newoverview.html
>
> --
>
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
