VMS Software prunes OpenVMS hobbyist program
- Reference: 1712658725
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/04/09/vsi_prunes_hobbyist_prog/
- Source link:
The corporation behind the continued development of OpenVMS, VMS Software, Inc. – or VSI to its friends, if it has any left after this – has announced the latest [1]Updates to the Community Program . The news does not look good: you can't get the Alpha and Itanium versions any more, only a limited x86-64 edition.
OpenVMS is one of the granddaddies of big serious OSes. A direct descendant of the OSes that inspired DOS, CP/M, OS/2, and Windows, as well as the native OS of the hardware on which Unix first went 32-bit, VMS has been around for nearly half a century. For decades, its various owners have offered various flavors of [2]"hobbyist program" under which you could get licenses to install and run it for free, as long as it wasn't in production use.
[3]
Since Compaq acquired DEC, then HP acquired Compaq, its prospects looked checkered. HP [4]officially killed it off in 2013, then in 2014 [5]granted it a reprieve and sold it off instead. New owner VSI [6]ported it to x86-64 , releasing that [7]new version 9.2 in 2022.
[8]
[9]
Around this time last year, we covered VSI [10]adding AMD support and opening a hobbyist program of its own. It seems from the latest announcement that it has been disappointed by the reception:
Despite our initial aspirations for robust community engagement, the reality has fallen short of our expectations. The level of participation in activities such as contributing open source software, creating wiki articles, and providing assistance on forums has not matched the scale of the program. As a result, we find ourselves at a crossroads, compelled to reassess and recalibrate our approach.
Although HPE [11]stopped offering hobbyist licenses for the original VAX versions of OpenVMS in 2020, VSI continued to maintain OpenVMS 8 (in other words, the Alpha and Itanium editions) while it worked on version 9 for x86-64. VSI even offered a [12]Student Edition , which included a [13]freeware Alpha emulator and a copy of OpenVMS 8.4 to run inside it.
[14]Canonical cracks down on crypto cons following Snap Store scam spree
[15]Red Hat tries on a McKinsey cap in quest to streamline techies' jobs
[16]Good news: HMRC offers a Linux version of Basic PAYE Tools. Bad news: It broke
[17]FreeBSD Foundation hands out Beacon gongs for safer software
Those licenses run out in 2025, and they won't be renewed. If you have vintage DEC Alpha or HP Integrity boxes with Itanic chips, you won't be able to get a legal licensed copy of OpenVMS for them, or renew the license of any existing installations – unless you pay, of course.
There will still be a [18]Community license edition, but from now on it's x86-64 only. Although OpenVMS 9 mainly targets hypervisors anyway, it does support bare-metal operations on a single model of HPE server, the [19]ProLiant DL380 Gen10 . If you have one of them to play with – well, tough. Now Community users only get a VM image, supplied as a VMWare .vmdk file. It contains a ready-to-go "OpenVMS system disk with OpenVMS, compilers and development tools installed." Its license runs for a year, after which you will get a fresh copy.
This means you won't be able to configure your own system and keep it alive – you'll have to recreate it, from scratch, annually. The only alternative for those with older systems is to [20]apply to be an OpenVMS Ambassador.
[21]
The decision is understandable. There is no new Alpha or Itanium hardware and never will be. VSI is a business, and not a big one; it needs to make money. While it was maintaining v8, it continued offering hobbyist licenses for it, but now, if OpenVMS has a future, it's v9. VSI put a lot of effort – and money – into creating the new x86-64 edition. Version 9 is its only chance of survival, so that's what it wants to promote.
But saying that… rare indeed are those passionate about vintage enterprise software that they want to run old big-iron servers in their basements, and keep them legally licensed. Alienating those folks doesn't look good, and surely won't help. The Reg FOSS desk suspects that the main result will be to encourage them to run up the skull and crossbones flag and become software pirates. ®
Get our [22]Tech Resources
[1] https://vmssoftware.com/about/news/2024-03-25-community-license-update/
[2] https://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZhVmH6JkTn8Y9nKBaNUoXgAAAFU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2013/06/10/openvms_death_notice/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2014/07/31/openvms_spared/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2016/10/13/openvms_moves_slowly_towards_x86/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/10/openvms_92/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZhVmH6JkTn8Y9nKBaNUoXgAAAFU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZhVmH6JkTn8Y9nKBaNUoXgAAAFU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/04/13/openvms_921_x86_hobby/
[11] https://www.openvmshobbyist.com/forum/viewthread.php?forum_id=20&thread_id=3524
[12] https://training.vmssoftware.com/student-license/
[13] http://mail.migrationspecialties.com/FreeAXP.html
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/28/canonical_snap_store_scams/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/27/red_hat_hires_mckinsey/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/26/hmrc_linux_paye_tools/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/26/beacon_awards_freebsd/
[18] https://vmssoftware.com/community/community-license/
[19] https://www.hpe.com/psnow/doc/a00008180enw.html
[20] https://share.hsforms.com/131UO5x_iSEGxlYs8pQTYSQdi37l
[21] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZhVmH6JkTn8Y9nKBaNUoXgAAAFU&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[22] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Grr [Vax wasn't the first 32-bit platform]
The University of Wollongong's port of 6th edition Unix to an Interdata 7/32 completed July 1977 (reputed to be the first port from the pdp11), was to a 32 bit system [1]https://documents.uow.edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@inf/@scsse/documents/doc/uow103747.pdf"
I don't know whether the kernel and userland was 16 or 32 bit.
[1] https://documents.uow.edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@inf/@scsse/documents/doc/uow103747.pdf
Re: Grr [Vax wasn't the first 32-bit platform]
Thank you, that's the system I was trying to remember (I think). Good point about the bitness of the software, I hadn't actually thought about that; and I should probably curtail my inclination to "I seem to remember" given the demonstrable unwillingness of my memory to ever divulge any useful details.
Re: Grr [Vax wasn't the first 32-bit platform]
> I don't know whether the kernel and userland was 16 or 32 bit.
Excellent point, well made.
(As an IMHO wonderful intersection of the historical and the personal, the same Richard Miller did the original port of Plan 9 to the Raspberry Pi!)
I did know of this but overlooked it.
I suspect that, as the machine had 192kB of RAM and 2 x 5MB disks or so, it was a straight 16-bit port, but I don't know that. I quickly reread the essays from the time about the port but they don't clarify.
Re: Grr [Vax wasn't the first 32-bit platform]
"FRUSTRATIONS:
In the years 1977-1980 I tried in vain to interest our industry, our university, and our government in the remarkable lead that we had on the rest of the world."
The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh?
And I was going to make a joke about "does Linux support Interdata 7/32?" but I'm just too sad, now.
Re: Grr
> I was already long since resigned to never being able to run VMS on my Vaxes again
Far be it from me to advocate anything but I have successfully licensed OpenVMS 7 in a VAX SimH session. It can be done and it's not hard.
Next I have to work out how to cluster the 3 VAXstation 4000VLCs in my basement in Prague, and netboot them from SimH...
Re: Grr
I still have my internal PAKs from DEC (well, in theory) so my Vaxes could just go 30 years back in time, I suppose. But apart from being a bit naughty from a licensing point of view, I'd just be all "but that's not right!" when I see the date. Currently running ITS on the PiDP-10 emulator (it has flashing lights and everything! Everyone here should have one, etc) which handles 21st century dates randomly well: sometimes it does it correctly, other times the year comes out as 124, but at least it tries . And is quite trying, as much as it's interesting to see the origin of so much stuff we take for granted.
Forever 2024?
《Those licenses run out in 2025, and they won't be renewed. If you have vintage DEC Alpha or HP Integrity boxes with Itanic chips, you won't be able to get a legal licensed copy of OpenVMS for them, or renew the license of any existing installations – unless you pay, of course.》
I suspect DEC's lmf licensing is clever enough to detect reset clocks but surpring how many systems aren't.
If you were just running VMS to keep the hardware functional and preserve computing history you don't really require updates, maintenance or support. Using a ground hog day loop between 2024-01-01 and 2024-12-31 (or licenses' range) isn't likely to deprive VSI of any conceivable benefit whatever the the legal position.
Bit like running Multics not that you would have a GE 645 in the basement. ;)
One word...
LMFGEN
It's our only way forward from here. It's been the only way for all of us hardcore VAX preservationists since 2020, as the article points out.
If there is demand from hobbyist to run VMS then I sure somebody will find a way to creatively get around the yearly licence limitations.
Grr
Well that sucks, though as I was already long since resigned to never being able to run VMS on my Vaxes again I guess I'm already pre-disappointed. In the case of the Vax, I'm still not sure if that was even a policy decision or because HP were alleged to have lost track of who has the rights to it.
Regarding 32-bit Unix, I have a vague memory that the Vax wasn't the first 32-bit platform as they really didn't want to risk it being a DEC-only OS; but the details of what might have been currently elude me. I still have fond memories of my first encounter, Ultrix on the college's Vax 8650. Of course we hated each other at first, all the most lasting friendships are like that.