Frank,

        There is a focus discussion group already talking about the concept of
"open" MPE.  It can be subscribed to at [log in to unmask]

Thanx,
        Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Frank Gribbin
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 10:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] HP3000 retirement


On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:57:00 -0500, Jim Phillips
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Richard Barker <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>
>> I think this is going to upset a few of you:
>
>Join the club :-)
>
><snip>
>
>I've pondered over Richard's thoughts for at least 30 seconds and I had to
>ask myself some hard questions:
>
>Why do I want to continue using the HP3000?

>We have only one canned application and that's the accounting package that
>runs on NT and requires a faster, bigger server every time we upgrade, not
>to mention conversion costs from one version to the next.  I guess that's
>another real superiority to the HP3000:  We've added a lot of functionality
>to our home-grown systems and not had to upgrade the system for over four
>years, whilst the NT server has been upgraded twice to support the
>accounting package.
>


Maybe THAT is the point.  Other OS's are much more expensive to operate and
this is a good thing is you are a vendor.

I've been pondering open source MPE and there are good reasons for HP to
support this.  Finishing the port to Intel would have to be a priority
though.  Does anyone know where this stands in light of the announcement ?

Frank Gribbin

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *