4 ms·

Congratulations on the new package manager. But despite its name, OpenVMS is still actually not open.

tombert 2y ago
Yeah, that has always confused me. When I first started playing with Linux and BSD, I would see OpenVMS popping up in my searches, only to find that it wasn't actually open. I'm sure there's legacy reasons for that, but it always sort of annoyed me because I wanted play with it
- bitwize 2y ago
  It's "open" in the sense of the Open Software Foundation, OPENSTEP, or OpenGL. Back in the pre-CATB days, "open" meant "developed by a consortium rather than a vendor", or perhaps even just "ported to more than one CPU architecture". This latter sense is what is meant in OpenVMS, as it was ported to DEC Alpha CPUs in the mid-90s.
  - flomo 2y ago
    I believe in this case, "open" = supports UNIX/POSIX apis.
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    And that there was documentation on how it worked.
    - zie 2y ago
      It was literally a complete bookshelf completely full for the docs.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- tom_ 2y ago
  Always bothered me too. At least POSIX is actually a POS.
skissane 2y ago
> But despite its name, OpenVMS is still actually not open. This is a very anachronistic complaint - DEC renamed VMS to OpenVMS in 1992, and at the time “open” had nothing to do with “open source” since that phrase wasn’t even coined until 1998. In 1992, “Open” meant “open standards”/“open systems” - support for industry standards instead of proprietary ones - most importantly POSIX. VMS became OpenVMS when it acquired POSIX compatibility. And other vendors used the same branding-IBM offered mainframe POSIX compatibility under the names OpenEdition (MVS) and OpenExtensions (VM)
- KerrAvon 2y ago
  It’s not anachronistic to make this complaint about a product still being sold in 2025. The product name is now an anachronism.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- technothrasher 2y ago
  > since that phrase wasn’t even coined until 1998. This idea that Christine Peterson invented the term open source in 1998 is revisionist history. I personally remember the term being used during the early 90's, and here's a Usenet thread from 1990 that backs up my memory: https://web.archive.org/web/20220213152832/https://www.tech-insider.org/personal-computers/research/1990/1126.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220213152832/https://www.tech-... (The relevant text is a little way down in the thread: "BSD's open source policy meant that user developed software could be ported among platforms...") Heck, here's a Caldera press release from 1996 that argues directly against your point that OpenVMS couldn't have been confused with open source. In the press release, Caldera announce their "OpenDOS" which is, they say, an "OPEN SOURCE CODE MODEL FOR DOS" https://web.archive.org/web/20200521004332/http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/fall96/0269.html https://web.archive.org/web/20200521004332/http://www.xent.c...
  - icedchai 2y ago
    I agree and remember similar. I wouldn't be surprised if someone else says that "open source" doesn't mean "Open Source" in the "official" (whatever that means) sense. Wikipedia seems to support the revisionist history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
p_ing 2y ago
Per their wiki - > The operating system originally called VAX/VMS was renamed to OpenVMS around 1991 to reflect the high degree of support for industry standards such as POSIX. > This prefix is now generally regarded as silent by OpenVMS users and developers calling the operating system "VMS". https://wiki.vmssoftware.com/OpenVMS https://wiki.vmssoftware.com/OpenVMS

Yeah, that has always confused me. When I first started playing with Linux and BSD, I would see OpenVMS popping up in my searches, only to find that it wasn't actually open. I'm sure there's legacy reasons for that, but it always sort of annoyed me because I wanted play with it

bitwize 2y ago
It's "open" in the sense of the Open Software Foundation, OPENSTEP, or OpenGL. Back in the pre-CATB days, "open" meant "developed by a consortium rather than a vendor", or perhaps even just "ported to more than one CPU architecture". This latter sense is what is meant in OpenVMS, as it was ported to DEC Alpha CPUs in the mid-90s.
- flomo 2y ago
  I believe in this case, "open" = supports UNIX/POSIX apis.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  And that there was documentation on how it worked.
  - zie 2y ago
    It was literally a complete bookshelf completely full for the docs.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
tom_ 2y ago
Always bothered me too. At least POSIX is actually a POS.

skissane 2y ago

> But despite its name, OpenVMS is still actually not open. This is a very anachronistic complaint - DEC renamed VMS to OpenVMS in 1992, and at the time “open” had nothing to do with “open source” since that phrase wasn’t even coined until 1998. In 1992, “Open” meant “open standards”/“open systems” - support for industry standards instead of proprietary ones - most importantly POSIX. VMS became OpenVMS when it acquired POSIX compatibility. And other vendors used the same branding-IBM offered mainframe POSIX compatibility under the names OpenEdition (MVS) and OpenExtensions (VM)

KerrAvon 2y ago
It’s not anachronistic to make this complaint about a product still being sold in 2025. The product name is now an anachronism.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
technothrasher 2y ago
> since that phrase wasn’t even coined until 1998. This idea that Christine Peterson invented the term open source in 1998 is revisionist history. I personally remember the term being used during the early 90's, and here's a Usenet thread from 1990 that backs up my memory: https://web.archive.org/web/20220213152832/https://www.tech-insider.org/personal-computers/research/1990/1126.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220213152832/https://www.tech-... (The relevant text is a little way down in the thread: "BSD's open source policy meant that user developed software could be ported among platforms...") Heck, here's a Caldera press release from 1996 that argues directly against your point that OpenVMS couldn't have been confused with open source. In the press release, Caldera announce their "OpenDOS" which is, they say, an "OPEN SOURCE CODE MODEL FOR DOS" https://web.archive.org/web/20200521004332/http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/fall96/0269.html https://web.archive.org/web/20200521004332/http://www.xent.c...
- icedchai 2y ago
  I agree and remember similar. I wouldn't be surprised if someone else says that "open source" doesn't mean "Open Source" in the "official" (whatever that means) sense. Wikipedia seems to support the revisionist history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source

p_ing 2y ago

Per their wiki - > The operating system originally called VAX/VMS was renamed to OpenVMS around 1991 to reflect the high degree of support for industry standards such as POSIX. > This prefix is now generally regarded as silent by OpenVMS users and developers calling the operating system "VMS". https://wiki.vmssoftware.com/OpenVMS https://wiki.vmssoftware.com/OpenVMS