Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!decvax!wivax!cadmus!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!kaiser%jaws.dec-marlboro.arpa@BRL-AOS.ARPA From: kaiser%jaws.dec-marlboro.arpa@BRL-AOS.ARPA Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: raw rumour: VAX 8600 & Ultrix Message-ID: <6539@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Sun, 9-Dec-84 06:21:39 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.6539 Posted: Sun Dec 9 06:21:39 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 13-Dec-84 01:55:57 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 50 >Fred Avolio, DEC -- U{LTR,N}IX Support: > >> Rumour of unknown quality: DEC won't have Ultrix running on the VAX >> 8600 for at least 1 year. Can anyone comment on this? What about the >> supposedly standard VAX architechture? > >My understanding -- not speaking officially, you understand -- is 6 months >to availability. (The architecture is standard and Ultrix-32 will run on >it.) You may be interested in some broad details about what happens in Digital in getting a product into the field. This is relevant to the question of when ULTRIX-32 will be shipped to customers for the VAX 8600. Suppose a new model VAX is built. Before it can be released to be sold as a supported product -- "supported" is a key term -- the creators must satisfy a substantial list of requirements in testing it. These requirements occupy large documents, and if anything, they're very conservative. For instance, a new VAX processor must successfully execute a known test suite consisting partly of an extremely large number of test passes of every instruction. There must be diagnostics that can be demonstrated to diagnose properly. The physical machinery in its final packaging must pass tests for the emission of noise and radiation, operation in a given temperature range, and even (for example) how far it may be tilted before it falls over. I mention all this in the context of hardware because it seems to me simpler to visualize with respect to hardware. However, software also must pass such tests, in its universe, in order to be supported -- i.e., releasable to customers at large. The coding and documen- tation must meet certain standards. There must be test procedures which demonstrably exercise the software properly. It must be shown to be main- tainable at certain levels of effort. It must be appropriately packaged in terms of physical distribution, installability, and consistency. Responsible persons must sign their names to the effect that requirements are met, and this is not just pro forma. And finally the developers must submit their baby to an independent certifying body, which always, so far as I know, takes at least a month (for the smallest products) to check that all requirements have been met. I dare say none of this is unusual for a major manufacturer of software. Is it? In more immediate terms, it means that the question "when will ULTRIX-32 run on the VAX 8600" may not be what you want to know. You probably want to know when it will be available for sale; i.e., when it will be a supported product. It may already run. ---Pete kaiser%jaws.dec@decwrl.arpa, kaiser%belker.dec@decwrl.arpa {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-jaws!kaiser