| which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27427] |
Tue, 23 October 2001 17:13  |
Richard French
Messages: 173
Registered: December 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I am still stunned by RSI's decision to cut out
so many established UNIX platforms. I noticed in
the 5.5 release that, not only is Alpha True64
ending up in the trash can (so much for all of
us old DEC users who have relied on IDL for a
decade), but IBM unix stations are being
'considered' for possible sacrifice next time
around (at least, that is how I read their
statement).
Loss of cross-platform compatibility is one
big loss, of course, but another is the fear
that whatever choice one makes for a replacement
to an abandoned flavor of UNIX will be the next
one on RSI's list of unprofitable systems. They
want to concentrate on their 'core constituents'
but they don't give any indication of which
system they consider their highest priority. Do
any of you want to invest $10K in a new firebreathing
commercial workstation from Sun, only to find in
three years that RSI doesn't think it is sufficiently
profitable to stay on the select list of supported
systems?
I've been using IDL for work on the NASA Cassini
mission to Saturn. I've been telling my colleagues
for years that its great strength is that IDL
code is portable across operating systems. So
much for that argument. I think we will have
to change to MATLAB, much as I don't want to.
I wish there were a way to get a straight answer
on this from RSI. It is a serious question. I am
deeply disappointed.
Dick French
Astronomy Dept
Wellesley College.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27599 is a reply to message #27515] |
Thu, 25 October 2001 12:06  |
Stein Vidar Hagfors H[1]
Messages: 56
Registered: February 2000
|
Member |
|
|
"Richard Cooke" <rcooke@rsinc.com> writes:
> Not to worry, IDL will not turn its back on its cross platform roots. AIX
> has strong following in Europe and we are working closely with IBM to ensure
> continued support for IDL on this platform. We are also very close to
> finishing our investigation of whether or not we can provide a
> unix/x-windows implementation for Mac OS X (which looks promising at the
> moment) that will allow us to continue to economically support the Macintosh
> platform. Don't read too much into this situation. Unix platforms by and
> large are fairly inexpensive to support. With Compaq's announcement that
> they are abandoning the Alpha chip we sort of saw the writing on the wall
> (aside from the fact that very few of our customers actually buy licenses
> for this platform).
The question isn't so much the *Alpha* chip, but Tru64, which is bound to
continue on the 64-bit Intel stuff that may look and feel slightly alpha-ish,
given that they've acquired most of the Alpha development team.. no?
--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Stein Vidar Hagfors Haugan
ESA SOHO SOC/European Space Agency Science Operations Coordinator for SOHO
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Email: shaugan@esa.nascom.nasa.gov
Mail Code 682.3, Bld. 26, Room G-1, Tel.: 1-301-286-9028/240-354-6066
Greenbelt, Maryland 20771, USA. Fax: 1-301-286-0264
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27640 is a reply to message #27427] |
Tue, 30 October 2001 05:16 |
Francis Burton
Messages: 11
Registered: October 2001
|
Junior Member |
|
|
"K. Bowman" wrote:
> I have gotten no replies to either e-mails or snail-mails.
I received a short but courteous reply to my email directing
me to look at their web page "as there are some further
announcements on actions being taken".
Francis
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27656 is a reply to message #27427] |
Mon, 29 October 2001 14:39 |
Ken Mankoff
Messages: 158
Registered: February 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 29 Oct 2001, K. Bowman wrote:
> In article <3BDDCF0B.42C18BA3@wellesley.edu>, Richard G. French
> <rfrench@wellesley.edu> wrote:
>
>> Too bad that RSI did not follow that advice. Has anyone else gotten
>> a response to a personal letter indicating unhappiness with their
>> decision to drop Tru64 support?
>
> I have gotten no replies to either e-mails or snail-mails. What kind
> of shape is the company in?
>
> I think I will get a Matlab or PV-WAVE license and install GrADS as
> purely defensive measures.
>
I got a very nice letter this morning from RSI. I never wrote to them
about Tru64, but about the whole apple mac fiasco. I have deleted it so I
cannot repost it here, but it explained much of what was "officially"
posted to the NG:
checking commercial X packages,
checking the portability of add-on routines (HDF, etc)
notes that ENVI comes easy if everything else works
etc...
Company appears in good shape...
-k.
--
Ken Mankoff
LASP://303.492.3264
http://lasp.colorado.edu/~mankoff/
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27657 is a reply to message #27427] |
Mon, 29 October 2001 14:29 |
K. Bowman
Messages: 330
Registered: May 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <3BDDCF0B.42C18BA3@wellesley.edu>, Richard G. French
<rfrench@wellesley.edu> wrote:
> Too bad that RSI did not follow that advice. Has anyone else gotten
> a response to a personal letter indicating unhappiness with their
> decision to drop Tru64 support?
I have gotten no replies to either e-mails or snail-mails. What kind
of shape is the company in?
I think I will get a Matlab or PV-WAVE license and install GrADS as
purely defensive measures.
Ken
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27662 is a reply to message #27427] |
Mon, 29 October 2001 13:50 |
Richard French
Messages: 173
Registered: December 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> Sorry, Stein, but I think you've got it exactly wrong. A merged
> HP-Compaq, led by HP, has no need for Tru64 when HP has HP-UX, which is
> 64-bit as of version 11.0. Frankly, I think OpenVMS has a better chance
> of survival in HPaq than Tru64 does.
>
> Come back in five years and the incorrect prognosticator can buy
> the correct a bottle of beer.
>
> Joe
I wrote to RSI support to voice my 'disappointment' in their decision to
drop
support for Tru64, as William Thompson also did. I never got an answer
from RSI, which is yet another disappointment. I have been a fierce
defender of IDL for more then a decade, but this latest news has really
put me in a jam.
I did get an invitation from PV-WAVE (Visual Numerics)
to convert my license to PV-WAVE. The letter had the interesting phrase:
"Cross-platform compatibility is a big concern, especially for
existing customers. The time to consider commercial viability is before
adding a platform to the supported list, not after you have customers."
Too bad that RSI did not follow that advice. Has anyone else gotten
a response to a personal letter indicating unhappiness with their
decision to drop Tru64 support?
Dick French
|
|
|
|
| Re: which *nix will RSI nix next? [message #27666 is a reply to message #27599] |
Mon, 29 October 2001 12:56 |
Joseph B. Gurman
Messages: 31
Registered: April 2000
|
Member |
|
|
In article <xmzbsivilo6.fsf@esa.nascom.nasa.gov>, Stein Vidar Hagfors
Haugan <shaugan@esa.nascom.nasa.gov> wrote:
[snip]
>
> The question isn't so much the *Alpha* chip, but Tru64, which is bound to
> continue on the 64-bit Intel stuff that may look and feel slightly alpha-ish,
> given that they've acquired most of the Alpha development team.. no?
Sorry, Stein, but I think you've got it exactly wrong. A merged
HP-Compaq, led by HP, has no need for Tru64 when HP has HP-UX, which is
64-bit as of version 11.0. Frankly, I think OpenVMS has a better chance
of survival in HPaq than Tru64 does.
Come back in five years and the incorrect prognosticator can buy
the correct a bottle of beer.
Joe
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
