From: clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
      
   On 2025-09-04, Dan Cross  wrote:   
   > In article <109c9pn$1r966$1@dont-email.me>,   
   > Dave Froble   wrote:   
   >>Yes, there are possibilities, and VSI isn't the most secure   
   >>choice, but what is?  Hate to break it to you, but you are spreading FUD.   
   >>   
   >>Perhaps deal with "what is", and if that changes, then just "handle it".   
   >   
   > It is not only reasonable to evaluate the risk tradeoffs   
   > involved, I would argue that it is madatory for a responsible   
   > professional.  The best response   
   >   
   > Reflexively shutting someone down by accusing them of spreading   
   > FUD isn't useful when people raise legitimate concerns about the   
   > future of VMS, and Simon raised a very legitimate concern: the   
   > probability that VSI would go under and VMS disappear in a   
   > flurry of lawsuits is much, much higher than the probability   
   > that Linux is going to disappear any time in the next century.   
   >   
   > Surely this must weigh on the minds of folks in charge of making   
   > technology and purchasing decisions, and so dismissing those   
   > concerns out of hand is not helpful.  Instead, lobbying VSI to   
   > address them and put in place assurances would be a more useful   
   > response if one wants to keep seeing VMS available.   
   >   
      
   I would go even further and say that perception of reality _IS_ reality   
   when it comes to a manager making a decision that they will be held   
   accountable for if it goes wrong.   
      
   IOW, the manager will make a decision based on what they perceive as   
   reality which is Linux (vast ecosystem so they can say I was only   
   following the market) versus VMS (very small ecosystem, depends on   
   one vendor, not the mainstream option) if all other things are equal   
   (availability of products, robustness, reliability, security, etc).   
      
   It doesn't matter if the actual reality in terms of risks to the   
   company is different; it only matters that the manager perceives   
   that their model of reality _is_ reality.   
      
   VSI need to provide policies/business models/etc that somehow make   
   the small ecosystem VMS to appear to be seen as the less risky option   
   when compared to the other options and to make these very general and   
   very widely known options. It's also not enough for VMS to have the   
   _same_ risk as the other mainstream options; it needs to be seen as   
   the lower risk.   
      
   Note that I said risks, not costs.   
      
   Simon.   
      
   --   
   Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP   
   Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)