Following up on my longstanding concerns about the future of OpenVMS: http://news.com.com/HP+to+rejuvenate+OpenVMS+on+Monday/2100-1016_3-5537046.html http://news.com.com/HP+looks+beyond+Fiorina/2009-7341_3-5569425.html >From the second page of the first URL above: When HP bought Compaq, OpenVMS "was probably one of the close calls when they decided what was going to move forward and what projects they were going to cancel, simply because OpenVMS is clearly for legacy systems," said Illuminata analyst Gordon Haff. "When (administrators of) legacy systems are faced with a transition, they are going to look at other alternatives." But presumably, HP did the math and decided the investment was worthwhile--unlike the conclusion it reached with its largely phased-out HP 3000 line. The OpenVMS business was profitable in 2003, but HP declined to state whether it is today, citing investor regulations. According to c|net news, the day Fiorina/HP bought Compaq was "a day of infamy" in the company's history. I suppose that has little to do with OpenVMS. We'll see what happens with a new CEO at HP. We don't know what they'll do with OpenVMS, but I envision them keeping it going unless they are operating at a loss. If they can offer help with transitions from OpenVMS to UNIX/Linux, they might retain more customers than if they make it equally easy for their customers to leave for a different service provider. They should be able to capitalize on loyalty. If they do nothing to aid in transitions away from OpenVMS, then why won't current OpenVMS customers dump HP for another company? With the current OpenVMS customer base continuing to erode, they'll have to cut their losses someday. What are your views? Mike -- Michael B. Miller, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Epidemiology and Community Health and Institute of Human Genetics University of Minnesota http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/~mbmiller/