Re: VMS clusters anyone? An advertising & marketing opportunity

From: John Smith (a_at_nonymous.com)
Date: 07/30/03 

Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 22:15:53 GMT

"Keith Parris" <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cf15391e.0307291306.3d56fbd5@posting.google.com...
> "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message
news:<ApxVa.137$hOa.29@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> > It's July 29, time to read this week's Between The Lines.
> > Business innovation powered by technology, brought to you by
> > InformationWeek magazine.
> >
> > ** IT Confidential: Paranoid Or Prepared: You Make The Call
>
> Excellent. Thanks for pointing this out, John.
>
> The URL is
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=12803
224

Keith,

What I don't get is why HP wouldn't have known this all along. I see
this kind of ostrich mentality by customers and potential customers
everyday.....no decent DR plan, no off-site recovery plan, their
backup consists of another server farm in the same room!!!! Sheesh.

One small prospective customer trades about $20e9 (to keep our British
friends talking the same numbers) daily. Zero DR backup plan. Nada.
Zilch. A Sun customer naturally.

Okay, VMS lost the desktop long ago, but there's no f!cking reason on
the face of this planet that it shouldn't DOMINATE the data center and
especially the DR market.

n-tier and web services make VMS a natural for the db and business
services tiers, for the heavy compute jobs, for the data mining jobs.

I did some consulting for a bank credit card group about 5 years ago,
designing their data warehouse. They put it on Sun. A good sized
system (sun's leading edge at the time) loaded with memory and an EMC
array. Did okay on performance. Shortly thereafter I was called in at
another bank to tune their similar credit card data warehouse on Alpha
(Tru64). It was what I would have considered at the time to be a
roughly comparable system to the Sun box at the other bank. On similar
queries and aggregation, the Alpha kicked Sun's *** - and I know that
VMS wouldn't have been far behind Tru64 on the result times. Data set
sizes were similar, about 1Tb.

So aside from now having an article from Information Week about how a
third of companies are no further prepared for disaster today than on
9-11, what's HP going to do about it as far as VMS is concerned?

You want me to send a copy of this message to carly(tm) or will you do
it?