From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

A new blog post by Darya

https://vmssoftware.com/resources/blog/2025-08-29-openvms-vs-linux-cost-comparison/

Interesting assumptions there...
--
Chris

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

On 8/29/2025 11:01 AM, Chris Townley wrote:

A new blog post by Darya

https://vmssoftware.com/resources/blog/2025-08-29-openvms-vs-linux-cost- comparison/

Interesting assumptions there...

But not bad assumptions.

I would summarize the numbers as:
- it cost 500-700 K$ per year to maintain app no matter
platform
- it would cost 300 K$ to migrate 1:1 from VMS Itanium to VMS x86-64
- it would cost 3 M$ to migrate from Cobol/VMS
to common tech stack/Linux
which respectively:
- is irrelevant for the conclusion
- is somewhere in the realistic to slightly optimistic range
- is very optimistic for 1 MLOC (I would have said 10-20 M$!!)

There is absolutely no doubt that VMS x86-64 is the lowest
cost solution.

The downside is that it is 1:1 so still Cobol, Rdb and
DECForms.

Arne

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

On 8/29/2025 11:33 AM, Arne Vajh|+j wrote:

On 8/29/2025 11:01 AM, Chris Townley wrote:

A new blog post by Darya

https://vmssoftware.com/resources/blog/2025-08-29-openvms-vs-linux-cost- comparison/

Interesting assumptions there...

But not bad assumptions.

I would summarize the numbers as:
- it cost 500-700 K$ per year to maintain app no matter
-a platform
- it would cost 300 K$ to migrate 1:1 from VMS Itanium to VMS x86-64
- it would cost 3 M$ to migrate from Cobol/VMS
-a to common tech stack/Linux
which respectively:
- is irrelevant for the conclusion
- is somewhere in the realistic to slightly optimistic range
- is very optimistic for 1 MLOC (I would have said 10-20 M$!!)

There is absolutely no doubt that VMS x86-64 is the lowest
cost solution.

The downside is that it is 1:1 so still Cobol, Rdb and
DECForms.

Why do you think migrating COBOL would be so difficult and expensive.
I would expect most of the other languages, which are very likely to
be used in the VMS environment, would be much more of a task migrating
away from VMS. Assuming, of course, that one has no choice but to
migrate away from VMS.

While I have never tried a MLOC program :-) just for fun I have taken
many COBOL programs from mainframe and mini environments and moved them
to Unix/Linux (my preference is Unix) environments with minimal mod-
ification. Mostly just things related to file system access as file
naming conventions vary so much across the IT world.

bill


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

On 8/29/2025 12:24 PM, bill wrote:

On 8/29/2025 11:33 AM, Arne Vajh|+j wrote:

On 8/29/2025 11:01 AM, Chris Townley wrote:

A new blog post by Darya

https://vmssoftware.com/resources/blog/2025-08-29-openvms-vs-linux-
cost- comparison/

Interesting assumptions there...

But not bad assumptions.

I would summarize the numbers as:
- it cost 500-700 K$ per year to maintain app no matter
-a-a platform
- it would cost 300 K$ to migrate 1:1 from VMS Itanium to VMS x86-64
- it would cost 3 M$ to migrate from Cobol/VMS
-a-a to common tech stack/Linux
which respectively:
- is irrelevant for the conclusion
- is somewhere in the realistic to slightly optimistic range
- is very optimistic for 1 MLOC (I would have said 10-20 M$!!)

There is absolutely no doubt that VMS x86-64 is the lowest
cost solution.

The downside is that it is 1:1 so still Cobol, Rdb and
DECForms.

Why do you think migrating COBOL would be so difficult and expensive.
I would expect most of the other languages, which are very likely to
be used in the VMS environment, would be much more of a task migrating
away from VMS.-a Assuming, of course, that one has no choice but to
migrate away from VMS.

While I have never tried a MLOC program :-)-a just for fun I have taken
many COBOL programs from mainframe and mini environments and moved them
to Unix/Linux (my preference is Unix) environments with minimal mod- ification.-a Mostly just things related to file system access as file
naming conventions vary so much across the IT world.

If you read the doc, then you will see that the the migration to
Linux is not a migration to Cobol/Linux, but a migration to
a JavaScript for frontend and Java/C# backend on Linux. Not a single
line of code will be reused in that model.

Cobol/Linux would be a third option.

Arne

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

On 2025-08-29, Arne Vajhoj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:

There is absolutely no doubt that VMS x86-64 is the lowest
cost solution.

This assumes of course that VSI does not go bust and that you now
have to port away from VMS before your time-limited production
licences expire.

That possibility may become the major factor in whether you stay
on VMS or not.

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.os.vms

On 8/29/2025 2:59 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:

On 2025-08-29, Arne Vajh|+j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:

There is absolutely no doubt that VMS x86-64 is the lowest
cost solution.

This assumes of course that VSI does not go bust and that you now
have to port away from VMS before your time-limited production
licences expire.

That possibility may become the major factor in whether you stay
on VMS or not.

I think that was a risk 3-5 years ago.

If VSI had not gotten VMS x86-64 out, then VMS and VSI would
have been a dead end.

But they got VMS x86-64 including compilers etc..

Unless VSI does something crazy then it is difficult to see
how they could go down in near or mid term.

(long term anything is possible)

number employees < annual revenue / average employee cost

will keep them over water.

More customer / existing customers buying more
from VSI will enable more VMS development.

And less will mean less.

Arne




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2