did anyone ever run W2k on an ES40 in production? the only dec hardware I ever touched that ran windows was an AlphaServer 1000, and my assignment was to get it back to running VMS. though, I'll admit now, i goldbricked a bit and spent some time trying out Digital UNIX first.
Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
11–20 of 84 posts
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#12did anyone ever run W2k on an ES40 in production? the only dec hardware I ever touched that ran windows was an AlphaServer 1000, and my assignment was to get it back to running VMS. though, I'll admit now, i goldbricked a bit and spent some time trying out Digital UNIX first.
Microsoft never shipped Alpha support for win2k in the release builds, but only the betas and release candidates, so I doubt anyone ran it in "production".
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#13Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#14This is pretty cool, it brings back memories. Thanks for posting. I used to manage Tru64 (Alpha) and OpenVMS (VAX and Alpha). Mostly Oracle DB and whatever they called their App development suite (horrible, horrible software) for a University's ERP system (called Banner) and infrastructure (Multinet on OpenVMS/VAX for DNS, DHCP, mail, etc). After that I moved on to AIX on Power5 for Oracle on HACMP and Veritas Cluste…
I forget that what I miss was not the system, but the community on the system. Solo VMS is a lonely experience.
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#15Somehow, Windows 2000 does not look dated to me. It looks functional and usable, and maybe even somewhat fresh. I never actually used it long-term (during college, started using Linux), so it can't be nostalgic. Anyone else feel the same?
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#16Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#17From Google, DEC Alpha is a RISC architecture, but I can’t see what es40 is, unless it’s just a fork code name?
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#18Somehow, Windows 2000 does not look dated to me. It looks functional and usable, and maybe even somewhat fresh. I never actually used it long-term (during college, started using Linux), so it can't be nostalgic. Anyone else feel the same?
The only thing better is server 2003.
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#19Somehow, Windows 2000 does not look dated to me. It looks functional and usable, and maybe even somewhat fresh. I never actually used it long-term (during college, started using Linux), so it can't be nostalgic. Anyone else feel the same?
Re: Run Windows 2000 on a DEC Alpha with a new es40 fork
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft never shipped Alpha support for win2k in the release builds, but only the betas and release candidates, so I doubt anyone ran it in "production".
oh, fair. i'd extend the question to include release builds of NT. where i operated alphas, NT ran on commodity x86 hardware, where VMS could not.
Microsoft continued to use 2000 on Alpha to work out bugs in 64bit support since it was the only 64bit platform they had supported that had operational hardware (support for PPC was only for 32bit), making it important bit in support of Itanium and soon later amd64 ports.
Some of the details made for Alpha support (including extended support for software like FX!32) are now backbone of x86-on-ARM support in windows ARM builds