HP3000-L Archives

February 1997, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 3 Feb 1997 12:22:01 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
I can't knock what HP said.  It all sounnded good.  However I still have
an uneasy feelng about HP's commitment to the 3000.  I asked about
language support  (keeping Transact up-to-date and bringing Cobol up
to the new standard).  They said we are working with the concerned SIG's
on this.  I am a member of both SIG's and they said, in essence, "wait for
the Strategic directions broadcast".  Are we chasing our tail?

The fact that they did not commit to implementing the full power of the
new Intel/HP chip on the 3000 was not too comforting.  When they say things
like "we don't see our customers requiring this", re 64 bit and the new chip, I
am disenchanted.  As users grow they will need more apability and power.
The 3000 must have the latest architecture. implemented to achieve this.

Enough said.

Nick Demos  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2