At 14:04 09/10/1998 -0700, Glenn Cole wrote:
>Subject:      Re: TPC benchmarks, anyone?
>Tony Shepherd writes:
>> Make management prove the logic of moving the 3K'ers to an inferior
>> solution that costs more.
>I fear there's a small fallacy here.
>By definition, management doesn't have to "prove" much of anything,
>and certainly not by the application of logic.
>I think we've all seen this more than once.... :/
>--Glenn

You're right of course - and yes we have seen this.  OTOH simple TPC
numbers could produce questions like "Tell me again why a $500,000 TPC 6 is
better than a $100,000 TPC 6?"

In general, lots of decisions are made these days by *) those who consider
themselves experts but are just good readers and talkers, *) those who are
intrigued by a bright shiny ball bouncing across the floor, and *) those
who are responsible for the bottom line. The first two groups can be
persuasive.  The third group responds to numbers and makes decisions.  So
give 'em numbers.

And just to speak to the obvious, an HP3K is not the right answer to every
question.  Every situation / client / industry / application / customer is
unique, and answers must relate to the requirements of each case.  TPC
ratings should only be a part of the whole picture.  But if there are no
ratings, there is a hole in the picture, and you shouldn't expect it to
show well in comparison to other offerings.

Okay - two postings in the same day from a devout lurker.  That should tell
you how important I think the subject is :)  Now, back to your regularly
scheduled postings.
--
Regards -- Tony B. Shepherd -- [log in to unmask]