On 2024-03-26, Robert A. Brooks <FIRST.LAST@vmssoftware.com> wrote:
> On 3/26/2024 2:43 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>
>> One further thought: I wonder what this means for systems like Eisner,
>> which are running on VSI time-limited licences ?
>
> As long as I'm at VSI (and I don't plan on leaving any time soon), I'll make
> sure that EISNER is taken care of.
>

Thank you Rob.

Simon.

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

On 2024-03-27, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>
> The changes does not make business sense for VSI.
>

Short-term or long-term business sense ? There's a difference.

Oh, and as for those "whiners" (as you call them) no longer running VMS,
perhaps they might be motivated to do so if the situation was different,
but maybe, as things stand, they can't be motivated to do so, and spend
their own time on other newly-interesting projects instead as their
interests have changed.

They should not be dismissed simply because they no longer run VMS, but
instead finding out _why_ they no longer run it could be useful in its
own right.

Simon.

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

On 27/03/2024 14:38, John Dallman wrote:
> In article <utulvc$1pmvc$1@dont-email.me>, news@cct-net.co.uk (Chris
> Townley) wrote:
>
>> Looks like a more restricted X86 - We can download a pre-built and
>> licensed VMDK with a few LP, including compilers
>
> Looking up what you can do with a VMDK, the options for running it seem
> to be QEMU, VirtualBox or VMware. The problems there are:
>
> * QEMU seems to be pretty complex, or at least, ill-documented.
> * VirtualBox is from Oracle, and thus subject to corporate whims.
> * VMware is from Broadcom, whose swingeing price rises are putting
> everyone off the product.
>
> My employers are large-scale users of VMware, but the price rises have
> them looking hard at alternatives.
>
> John

I set up a server running Ubuntu, and found it pretty easy to setup
KVM/QEMU. I set up 2 instances of VMS, albeit they are fairly simple, I
find they work extremely well. I have pretty much left my FreeAXP
instances alone, as I have my physical AXP

--
Chris

On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2024-03-26, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 3/26/24 6:53 PM, Jim Duff wrote:
>>> On 27/3/24 10:01, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 3/26/24 5:39 PM, Jim Duff wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> *I'm* certainly confused.  The email says "Your current license is
>>>>> valid through August 22, 2024"
>>>>
>>>> Which e-mail would that be?  The announcement about discontinuing Alpha
>>>> and Integrity community licenses doesn't appear to have anything like
>>>> that statement. It did say the existing licenses would be renewed one
>>>> more time "in August" -- presumably August 2024.
>>>
>>> I have to assume that when I get a personal email entitled "Updates to
>>> your Community License" that references "Your current license", it's
>>> referring to the only Community License I currently have, the one for
>>> x86_64.
>>
>> Ah, ok. I just got a rather generic e-mail entitled "Updates to VSI
>> Community License Program," not the personal one you got. It occurs to
>> me I don't even have a current license since my applications in
>> September and October 2023 were never either accepted or rejected. For
>> OpenVMS x86 I've been using the registration loophole where a prior
>> account on the service portal provides the ability to download a PAK.
>> If that's over then I guess I'm done. I applied for this new vmdk thing
>> today and this time didn't even get an automated acknowledgement, so
>> it's looking like this one may be ignored like my previous two applications.
>
> I wonder what happens to Perl on VMS in that case ?
>
> Are VSI packaging your Perl version in x86-64 VMS or are they maintaining
> their own Perl port ?

They are not maintaining their own port.

I guess I'll see what results from my application for the new community
license. I could probably qualify as an ambassador based on work I've
done in the past, but it's a little vague what the expectations are and
I don't have a lot of confidence they can actually process applications
for anything based on recent experience.

On 2024-03-27, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
> On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2024-03-26, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, ok. I just got a rather generic e-mail entitled "Updates to VSI
>>> Community License Program," not the personal one you got. It occurs to
>>> me I don't even have a current license since my applications in
>>> September and October 2023 were never either accepted or rejected. For
>>> OpenVMS x86 I've been using the registration loophole where a prior
>>> account on the service portal provides the ability to download a PAK.
>>> If that's over then I guess I'm done. I applied for this new vmdk thing
>>> today and this time didn't even get an automated acknowledgement, so
>>> it's looking like this one may be ignored like my previous two applications.
>>
>> I wonder what happens to Perl on VMS in that case ?
>>
>> Are VSI packaging your Perl version in x86-64 VMS or are they maintaining
>> their own Perl port ?
>
> They are not maintaining their own port.
>

So IOW, VSI are packaging something you have created as part of their
base installation.

> I guess I'll see what results from my application for the new community
> license. I could probably qualify as an ambassador based on work I've
> done in the past, but it's a little vague what the expectations are and
> I don't have a lot of confidence they can actually process applications
> for anything based on recent experience.
>

Given the above, you should not have to apply to continue getting free
access to VMS systems, and you certainly should not have to go through
this pre-built system only setup.

IMHO, the fact VSI have not already contacted you and arranged for your
continued free access to VMS systems, and based on the current setup, is
a major mistake on the part of VSI.

Given what you have provided to VSI for free, you should not be having
to apply for anything. :-(

I hope one of the VSI employees reading comp.os.vms are already having
a quiet word with the people responsible for this to get this situation
fixed quickly.

I would also recommend VSI review all the other open source software they
make available which is maintained by non-VSI people and arrange for those
people to have immediate continued access with the minimum of fuss and
change required.

If anyone reading this agrees with the above, could you say so here ?
It might provoke VSI into rapidly fixing this screwup by them.

Simon.

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

On 3/27/2024 3:58 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> I hope one of the VSI employees reading comp.os.vms are already having
> a quiet word with the people responsible for this to get this situation
> fixed quickly.

> If anyone reading this agrees with the above, could you say so here ?
> It might provoke VSI into rapidly fixing this screwup by them.

I have not counted. But I believe the current result is:

this is a good idea : 0
this is a bad idea : 50 or so magnitude

How much weight VSI put on c.o.v is another question.

> I would also recommend VSI review all the other open source software they
> make available which is maintained by non-VSI people and arrange for those
> people to have immediate continued access with the minimum of fuss and
> change required.

Yeah.

But it would be way easier to just let those people apply
for a CL license like before.

And one of the main reasons given for the change was
work administering this.

Arne

In article <uu1tpk$31o5s$1@dont-email.me>,
clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP says...
>
> On 2024-03-27, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
> > On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> >> On 2024-03-26, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ah, ok. I just got a rather generic e-mail entitled "Updates to VSI
> >>> Community License Program," not the personal one you got. It occurs to
> >>> me I don't even have a current license since my applications in
> >>> September and October 2023 were never either accepted or rejected. For
> >>> OpenVMS x86 I've been using the registration loophole where a prior
> >>> account on the service portal provides the ability to download a PAK.
> >>> If that's over then I guess I'm done. I applied for this new vmdk thing
> >>> today and this time didn't even get an automated acknowledgement, so
> >>> it's looking like this one may be ignored like my previous two applications.
> >>
> >> I wonder what happens to Perl on VMS in that case ?
> >>
> >> Are VSI packaging your Perl version in x86-64 VMS or are they maintaining
> >> their own Perl port ?
> >
> > They are not maintaining their own port.
> >
>
> So IOW, VSI are packaging something you have created as part of their
> base installation.
>
> > I guess I'll see what results from my application for the new community
> > license. I could probably qualify as an ambassador based on work I've
> > done in the past, but it's a little vague what the expectations are and
> > I don't have a lot of confidence they can actually process applications
> > for anything based on recent experience.
> >
>
> Given the above, you should not have to apply to continue getting free
> access to VMS systems, and you certainly should not have to go through
> this pre-built system only setup.
>
> IMHO, the fact VSI have not already contacted you and arranged for your
> continued free access to VMS systems, and based on the current setup, is
> a major mistake on the part of VSI.
>
> Given what you have provided to VSI for free, you should not be having
> to apply for anything. :-(
>
> I hope one of the VSI employees reading comp.os.vms are already having
> a quiet word with the people responsible for this to get this situation
> fixed quickly.
>
> I would also recommend VSI review all the other open source software they
> make available which is maintained by non-VSI people and arrange for those
> people to have immediate continued access with the minimum of fuss and
> change required.
>
> If anyone reading this agrees with the above, could you say so here ?
> It might provoke VSI into rapidly fixing this screwup by them.

I wonder how many people maintaining open-source packages will even
think its still worthwhile if the only people who can benefit from it
are corporate users.

Getting continued free access to OpenVMS for only as long as you're
maintaining some open-source package and only really for the benefit of
commercial users sounds more like an unpaid job than anything.

If VSI doesn't want to give away something for free anymore for the
benefit of the community, I'm not sure why VSI should expect this stuff
to be maintained for free for the benefit of their customers. If VSI
wants it they ought to be paying money for it.

On 28/3/2024 06:28, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2024-03-27, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>> On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-26, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
8< snip 8<
> So IOW, VSI are packaging something you have created as part of their
> base installation.
>
>> I guess I'll see what results from my application for the new community
>> license. I could probably qualify as an ambassador based on work I've
>> done in the past, but it's a little vague what the expectations are and
>> I don't have a lot of confidence they can actually process applications
>> for anything based on recent experience.
>>
>
> Given the above, you should not have to apply to continue getting free
> access to VMS systems, and you certainly should not have to go through
> this pre-built system only setup.
8< snip 8<
> If anyone reading this agrees with the above, could you say so here ?
> It might provoke VSI into rapidly fixing this screwup by them.
>
> Simon.

+1

--
Anyone, who using social-media, forms an opinion regarding anything
other than the relative cuteness of this or that puppy-dog, needs
seriously to examine their critical thinking.

On 3/27/24 2:58 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2024-03-27, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>> On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:

>>> Are VSI packaging your Perl version in x86-64 VMS or are they maintaining
>>> their own Perl port ?
>>
>> They are not maintaining their own port.
>>
>
> So IOW, VSI are packaging something you have created as part of their
> base installation.

They are using the standard distribution as well as some kit-building
procedures I created. This is all open source and they are not doing
anything wrong here.

What I have been doing for a long time that no one else has been doing
is fairly frequent builds of the current development branch followed by
fixing upstream whatever got broken since the last time I built. That
constant maintenance is why the standard distribution even works on VMS.

> Given what you have provided to VSI for free, you should not be having
> to apply for anything. :-(

Thanks for the note of support. I don't really feel that anybody owes me
anything, but "why are you making it harder for me to help you?" is a
question that's been rattling around in my head.

I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
Somehow there was too much interest and not enough "engagement"? If
Arne had put all his nice example code on a VSI-hosted wiki instead of
his own web site would that have convinced them that the community is
doing enough for VSI?

Meanwhile I still don't have even an auto-reply from applying for a new
community license.

On 3/27/2024 9:03 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <utvdak$2bpcm$1@dont-email.me>,
> Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> Well, if it was/is that much work, then should that not indicate that there has
>> been plenty of interest?
>
> One would think!
>
>> And if so, why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?
>
> I hate to be that guy, but...but it must be asked: were the eggs
> laid by that goose really all that golden? Were they seeing any
> return on it? My guess is, "no, not really."

My perspective has been that anything that gets or keeps interest in VMS is a
good thing for VMS.

>> Or, if there is such interest, perhaps some beancounter (everyone knows I
>> dislike beancounters, right?) sees it as a way to milk some money from the interest?
>>
>> The community license seemed like someone understood. What happened to that
>> understanding?
>
> It's been said before in this newsgroup, by me and others, that
> the current approach is non-competitive. It may be the only
> possible approach for business and legal reasons, but the idea
> of generating expanded sales around a closed-source, obscure
> commercial system was always exceedingly unlikely. Serving only
> the legacy market is, by definition, finite.

While I seem to consider the world running on Unix/Linux/WEENDOZE could be a
more dangerous place. Some might agree since IBM seems to be still doing well.
Yeah, they will run Linux, but, I think that is more marketing than anything else.

> And I say that as someone who actually really likes VMS and
> would like to see it remain available! I dislike software
> monocultures on a number of grounds, but the reality is that
> we're heading towards one. It's a real shame.

Well, if we get Trump, will anything matter? Good bye constitution, hello King
Donald the First. Someone was just pointing out on TV this morning that when
facisim (I can't spell it) comes to America, it will be carrying a US flag and a
bible. Ok, off topic ...

> Personally, I think the way to address this would have been to
> simply do away with PAKs and time-limited licenses entirely.

Gee, someone mentioned this years ago. Oh, that was me ...

> The idea that commercial users would expose themselves legally
> and operationally by using licenses that come out of pakgen or
> whatever never struck me as particularly evidence-based; maybe
> back in the day when small ma' and pa' operations were buying
> a microvax and putting it in the back office to run bookkeeping,
> but those days are long gone. Legacy customers in the fortune
> $n$-whatever are going to maintain their licenses because the
> risk cost of not doing so outweighs the cost of staying on the
> up-and-up. So what's the point of all the overhead at the OS
> level?

Indeed!

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:

> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.

Boost the share price.

On 3/27/2024 9:31 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2024-03-26, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>
>> No longer doing software work ...
>>
>
> In a way you are - you are still doing the maths/algorithms/procedures
> involved in building your aircraft... :-)
>
> Simon.
>

And for the most part, really enjoying it. The real fun should come this summer
when I get into test pilot mode.

I did discover, and am not surprised, I'm rather poor at finishing and painting.
Oh, well, it should not matter. I doubt anyone will be inspecting the paint
job when I'm buzzing them 6 inches below their hair line.

:-)

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 3/27/2024 1:39 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> On 3/27/24 8:43 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2024-03-26, Craig A. Berry <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 3/26/24 6:53 PM, Jim Duff wrote:
>>>> On 27/3/24 10:01, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/26/24 5:39 PM, Jim Duff wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *I'm* certainly confused. The email says "Your current license is
>>>>>> valid through August 22, 2024"
>>>>>
>>>>> Which e-mail would that be? The announcement about discontinuing Alpha
>>>>> and Integrity community licenses doesn't appear to have anything like
>>>>> that statement. It did say the existing licenses would be renewed one
>>>>> more time "in August" -- presumably August 2024.
>>>>
>>>> I have to assume that when I get a personal email entitled "Updates to
>>>> your Community License" that references "Your current license", it's
>>>> referring to the only Community License I currently have, the one for
>>>> x86_64.
>>>
>>> Ah, ok. I just got a rather generic e-mail entitled "Updates to VSI
>>> Community License Program," not the personal one you got. It occurs to
>>> me I don't even have a current license since my applications in
>>> September and October 2023 were never either accepted or rejected. For
>>> OpenVMS x86 I've been using the registration loophole where a prior
>>> account on the service portal provides the ability to download a PAK.
>>> If that's over then I guess I'm done. I applied for this new vmdk thing
>>> today and this time didn't even get an automated acknowledgement, so
>>> it's looking like this one may be ignored like my previous two applications.
>>
>> I wonder what happens to Perl on VMS in that case ?
>>
>> Are VSI packaging your Perl version in x86-64 VMS or are they maintaining
>> their own Perl port ?
>
> They are not maintaining their own port.
>
> I guess I'll see what results from my application for the new community
> license. I could probably qualify as an ambassador based on work I've
> done in the past, but it's a little vague what the expectations are and
> I don't have a lot of confidence they can actually process applications
> for anything based on recent experience.
>

If you're maintaining PERL for VMS, then why are you messing with a CL? You
should be in the developer program.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 3/27/2024 4:57 AM, Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote:
> Well well...
>
> Took my first VMS/DCL introduction course some 30+ years ago.
> Have been doing VMS work every single workday since then.
> Up to 2000 as emploided and up to now running my own company.
>
> My current/last assignment was cancelled by the customer on the
> last on June 2023 (last summer). I'm now into retirement plans...
>
> So what now? It is very mixed feelings. As much as I have loved
> my VMS work over the years, it is an very "empty" feeling at the
> moment. I have obviously put to much work and devotion in this
> and it is today clear that I have been very close to loosing both
> my wife and my familly over the years. That hurts *a lot* today.
> The only positive part is that I have provided an economical
> stability today for my wife and familly, but I have lost a lot
> of my childrens grow-up time.
>
> It is like all my efforts spent on work are just worthless today.
> Now I'm 100% devoted to my wife who I try to make up for all the
> lost time the last 40 years (incl my 10 PDP-11 years).
>
> I will probably simply leave everything VMS related behind and
> will not be either here on c.o.v or on the VSI forum.
>
> I might get a call from my last customer to do some consulting
> when they start up the project to move of the VMS platform into
> something else. I can just as well milk some last money from them,
> as long as it doesn't interfere with my devotion to my wife.
>
>
> It has been some fun also, with VMS and c.o.v. Thanks all!
>
> Jan-Erik Söderholm
> Sweden.

Wow Jan-Erik, are we twins? Some of what you write is also my story.

Note, you can still hang around here in any spare time. Someone(s) need to keep
Simon honest.

:-)

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 3/27/24 7:45 PM, Dave Froble wrote:

> If you're maintaining PERL for VMS, then why are you messing with a CL?
> You should be in the developer program.

I have never heard of a "developer" program. I have heard of ISV
licenses for people producing commercial software for sale. That never
seemed relevant for open source work, but if you have evidence to the
contrary, please enlighten me.

On 3/27/2024 8:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
>
> Boost the share price.

VSI is a private company not a public company.

Arne

On 3/27/2024 8:59 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>
> On 3/27/24 7:45 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>
>> If you're maintaining PERL for VMS, then why are you messing with a CL? You
>> should be in the developer program.
>
> I have never heard of a "developer" program. I have heard of ISV
> licenses for people producing commercial software for sale. That never
> seemed relevant for open source work, but if you have evidence to the
> contrary, please enlighten me.
>

Several years ago I mentioned to Mark Daniels that he should be in the
developer/ISV program, and he checked it out and joined. He seemed to be
pleased. Last I heard, he wasn't considering WASD a commercial product.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 3/27/24 8:47 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 3/27/2024 8:59 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>
>> On 3/27/24 7:45 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>
>>> If you're maintaining PERL for VMS, then why are you messing with a
>>> CL?  You
>>> should be in the developer program.
>>
>> I have never heard of a "developer" program.  I have heard of ISV
>> licenses for people producing commercial software for sale.  That never
>> seemed relevant for open source work, but if you have evidence to the
>> contrary, please enlighten me.
>>
>
> Several years ago I mentioned to Mark Daniels that he should be in the
> developer/ISV program, and he checked it out and joined.  He seemed to
> be pleased.  Last I heard, he wasn't considering WASD a commercial product.
>

Good to know. Here, under ISV license:

https://vmssoftware.com/products/licenses/

it says, "If you are an Independent Software Vendor of Commercial
software for OpenVMS...."

Maybe something has changed or maybe they don't really require that.

On 28/3/2024 12:17, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 3/27/2024 8:59 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>
>> On 3/27/24 7:45 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>
>>> If you're maintaining PERL for VMS, then why are you messing with a
>>> CL?  You
>>> should be in the developer program.
>>
>> I have never heard of a "developer" program.  I have heard of ISV
>> licenses for people producing commercial software for sale.  That never
>> seemed relevant for open source work, but if you have evidence to the
>> contrary, please enlighten me.
>>
>
> Several years ago I mentioned to Mark Daniels that he should be in the
> developer/ISV program, and he checked it out and joined.  He seemed to
> be pleased.  Last I heard, he wasn't considering WASD a commercial product.
Yes, I am pleased. No, it is not.

I understand my application was advocated for by Kerry Main and endorsed
by Eddie Orcutt at the time.

It certainly gave me early access to x86 for the port.

No reason why contributors to major software should not be considered.
Perhaps 'ambassador' might be a better fit. Until we know more...

--
Anyone, who using social-media, forms an opinion regarding anything
other than the relative cuteness of this or that puppy-dog, needs
seriously to examine their critical thinking.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 21:12:39 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

> On 3/27/2024 8:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
>>
>> Boost the share price.
>
> VSI is a private company not a public company.

Maybe they’re readying it for an acquisition?

On 3/27/2024 10:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 21:12:39 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>> On 3/27/2024 8:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
>>>
>>> Boost the share price.
>>
>> VSI is a private company not a public company.
>
> Maybe they’re readying it for an acquisition?

Uh, no.

Our parent company (Teracloud -- https://teracloud.com/)
likes to acquire companies, not get rid of them.

--

--- Rob

On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 22:58:36 -0400, Robert A. Brooks wrote:

> On 3/27/2024 10:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> VSI is a private company not a public company.
>>
>> Maybe they’re readying it for an acquisition?
>
> Uh, no.
>
> Our parent company (Teracloud -- https://teracloud.com/)
> likes to acquire companies, not get rid of them.

So I notice. It seems to have collected a real random mishmash of
businesses, with no clear cohesion behind them.

<https://teracloud.com/projects>

Seems it was founded in 2017, according to
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/teracloud-llc>. Since VSI existed before
that, that means it has already been acquired once.

On 28/03/2024 11:12 am, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 3/27/2024 8:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
>>
>> Boost the share price.
>
> VSI is a private company not a public company.

Private company's still have shares. In any case, they're possibly
juicing the value to sell off the IP. Getting a real case of Private
Equity here - did the new owners happen to bring in a lot of debt?

--
motk

On 3/28/2024 5:28 AM, Bork wrote:
> On 28/03/2024 11:12 am, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 3/27/2024 8:34 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:12:13 -0500, Craig A. Berry wrote:
>>>> I'm not sure what problem it is they are really trying to solve.
>>>
>>> Boost the share price.
>>
>> VSI is a private company not a public company.
>
> Private company's still have shares.

Yes. But since they are not traded there is no price
on the stock exchange to boost.

> In any case, they're possibly
> juicing the value to sell off the IP.

I doubt that. I don't think VSI got any IP that they can
sell.

Arne

On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 05:16:06 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 22:58:36 -0400, Robert A. Brooks wrote:
>
> > On 3/27/2024 10:43 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >>
> >>> VSI is a private company not a public company.
> >>
> >> Maybe they’re readying it for an acquisition?
> >
> > Uh, no.
> >
> > Our parent company (Teracloud -- https://teracloud.com/)
> > likes to acquire companies, not get rid of them.
>
> So I notice. It seems to have collected a real random mishmash of
> businesses, with no clear cohesion behind them.
>
> <https://teracloud.com/projects>
>
> Seems it was founded in 2017, according to
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/teracloud-llc>. Since VSI existed
> before that, that means it has already been acquired once.

More likely, in 2017 Johan Magnusson Gedda, an owner of VSI and of
few other, mostly bigger companies, moved his office to Copenhagen
and decided that at new place he wants to use a new name.