> Who tracks it?  Do you really think IBM would relinquish control of
> that?  The argument would really need to be convincing.

In the DECUS case, DEC got a monthly report from DECUS, just like they
got from any other DEC reseller. That was the biggest PITA for DECUS --
as a volunteer organization, they had to really get their ducks lined up
to keep DEC happy in that respect.

If your DECUS membership terminated, so did your right to use the
software, and while there was no really effective way to force people to
stop using some of the software once they had it (particularly for MUMPS
or RT-11), in most cases, people didn't abuse it. For VMS software,
DECUS actually had the ability to generate time-keyed LAKs (license
activation keys) that coincided with your renewal date for DECUS
membership, which made it a lot easier to enforce paying your dues..8-)

The success of that project also revolved around there being a very
small number -- in this case, only 1 -- of organizations permitted to do
this. I would probably expect WAVV to be the conduit for the VM and VSE
part of the program, and SHARE to be the conduit for z/OS-related stuff,
as their respective constituencies tend to fall along those lines.

> Although the ability to call the support center would be waived, it
> would still be good to be able to download fixes.  Between code cutoff
> and release, a number of fixes could be produced that are critical to
> the proper operation of the system.  Even a hobbyist would
> appreciate an
> operating system that works correctly.

DECUS did occasional "super-fix-packs" for really critical stuff, but to
get the cheap price, you either had to wait for a refresh, or just
suffer. That was the tradeoff -- it also ensured that people didn't run
production work on the hobbyist license. Also, often DEC only made older
releases available through this channel. You could still play with the
technology, but you might not have the latest and greatest.

> Pricing... Even ESL pricing (for VSE) is far beyond the reach of a
> hobbyist.  Engine based pricing for VM is even farther.  The pricing
> model would need to be influenced, taking in to account no support
> expressed or implied, etc, etc.

Typical prices were in the $300-$500 range for full operating systems
-- high enough so that you had to be fairly serious to get it, but still
within the budget for most normal humans. I think DECUS got a cut of
that, but that's not outside what I'd be willing to pay to be legal.
DECUS bore all the costs of reproduction, and you didn't get manuals or
any tech support other than what could be gleaned from friends and
mailing lists. You had to know what you were doing, or know Hunter
Goatley's email address...8-)

IBM might consider making VM/ESA available as a trial balloon in this
space. It's end of lifed, but VM/ESA 2.4 has a lot of useful life left
to it for someone to learn about virtualization, CMS, etc. It lacks a
lot of the performance and usability improvements that the latest z/VM
provides, but for hobby use, that's not a major issue. It doesn't really
compete with the current z/VM but it's good enough to get people started
with the ideas and concepts.

-- db


(PS- It's funny how much old DEC stuff tends to play out well 2nd time
around. When Joe Dempster and I originally suggested the LCDS to IBM,
they fought that too. It's been one of their most successful Linux in
virtual machines marketing ploys -- I'd hope they remember that...8-))

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Reply via email to