I also sent email to Carly and received responses from Mr. Stachnik.
Needless to say, my emotions were a bit on the agitated side, so the tone
is not always business-like, but I still think I got my point across.
Sometimes you just have to vent your frustrations, ya know?

Below are the emails in order.

 =======================================================================
>
>
> Original Message Follows:
> -------------------------
>
>
> This is a message to HP's CEO, Carly Fiorina, from a valued customer:
> Randall Keefer.
>
> Customer's Phone:
> Feedback Area:
>  - Product experience
>  - HP e3000
> Message:
> Ms. Fiorina,
>
>
> Have you, or any of your staff ever even logged onto an e3000?  Have you
> ever visited a business that runs an e3000?  If so, have you spoken to
> the computer staff there, and the user base and asked them what they
> thought of the machine?  I am confident that the answer to all of the
> above questions is "NO".
>
> Just because it has been around for 30 years, does not mean it is old.
> It means that it is trusted, tried, dependable, and efficient.
>
> I'd like to give you just one of many examples of this machine's value:
> I recently left a company that has an e3000 with 200+ users on it.  It
> is a series 967.  It is 11 years old and has crashed once in those 11
> years (other than power failures before the UPS was installed).  In
> 1994, the VP of the IS department decided to take one of the 16
> applications running on the e3000 and convert it to client-server.  Six
> years later and $8 million dollars, the application went live.  This
> application served 20 people in the company.  There are 6 programmers, 4
> technicians, and 2 DBAs taking care of this one application.  There are
> still 15 mission critical applications running on the e3000 (along with
> another 14 minor applications), serving 175 users.  The e3000 staff
> consists of 1 system manager/DBA, 1 operator/technician, and two
> programmers.  Just as a side not, the steal cabinets that were bought to
> hold the 12 servers for the client-server application cost more than the
> annual maintenance on the e3000/967.  Each of the 12 servers cost
> $45,000.  The annual budget for the entire e3000 hardware/software/salary
> is 15% of the client-server budget.  And that is for one application!
>
> So, yes, you are right to throw away such a piece of old just as the
> e3000.  It just doesn't make any business sense!  Maybe HP's thinking will
> work for Greyhound Bus Lines.  You need to let them know that they
> should get rid of thier buses and buy 13 Geo Metros for each bus and
> carry passengers 3 at a time in each Geo, and pay for the extra
> drivers for each car.  After all, a Geo Metro costs alot less than a
> bus.  They will just have more Metros on the road, and they will add up
> to a bus.  Each Metro is so cost effective!
>
> Just as a last note, I wonder if you have ever read "The HP Way" by David
> Packard? If not, may I suggest it as a necessary reading objective.
>
>
=======================================================================
Mr. Stachnik's response:
=======================================================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "STACHNIK,GEORGE (HP-Cupertino,ex3)" <[log in to unmask]>
To:
Cc: "CHIARAMONTE, RICH" <[log in to unmask]>; "ENOS, GEORGE"
<[log in to unmask]>; "MARTINO, CHRISTINE" <[log in to unmask]>;
"METCALF, TIM" <[log in to unmask]>; "PIERSON, KATHY"
<[log in to unmask]>; "PRATHER, WINSTON" <[log in to unmask]>; "RUDE,
FRANCESCA" <[log in to unmask]>; "SIERRA, RALPH"
<[log in to unmask]>; "VANCE, JEFF" <[log in to unmask]>; "WRIGHT, LISA"
<[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: Your Email to Carly Fiorina


> Dear Mr. Keefer,
>
> Thanks very much for your comments about HP's recent announcement
concerning
> the HP e3000.  Your email to Carly Fiorina was forwarded to me.  I work in
> the HP e3000 division of the Hewlett-Packard company.  I'll try to address
> some of your specific concerns.
>
> While I cannot comment on whether or not our CEO has ever "logged onto an
HP
> e3000", I can assure you that she has a very clear idea of what the HP
e3000
> business represents to HP, how long it has been around, and what a
reliable
> platform it is.  Because the HP e3000 has had such a long lifetime, some
> customers (such as yourself) have questioned our decision to discontinue
the
> HP e3000 product line.  Some of speculated that it is because of the
> proposed merger with Compaq, or because of the economic downturn that we
are
> experiencing.  Others have asked if the decision was made by Carly
Fiorina,
> or by the management of the HP e3000 division itself.
>
> In fact, HP made the decision to discontinue the HP e3000 because of
simple
> business reasons. It is against HP policy to comment on the sales of
> individual product lines.  But in recent years, our customers have
> demonstrated a clear preference for solutions based on low-cost,
> high-volume, open platforms based on standards.  Although proprietary
> operating systems have offered customers many key benefits, analysts have
> been reporting that sales of proprietary systems have been falling across
> the industry. At the same time, the open standard systems market has been
> steadily growing.
>
> This has had a profound impact on HP's ability to keep MPE/iX current.
> Technology is changing so quickly that the revenue generated by the HP
e3000
> will soon cease to justify the levels of investment required to keep it up
> to date, or even to support it at the level HP e3000 customers have come
to
> expect.
>
> This has impacted HP's partners too. Applications, accessories,
development
> tools, support and other essential HP e3000 products come from an
ecosystem
> of HP partner companies. Like the rest of the industry, this ecosystem is
> turning its attention toward low-cost high-volume, standards-based
products,
> and away from platforms such as the HP e3000, making it difficult for
> customers to find products that can be used with an HP e3000.
>
> Today, the HP e3000 platform is still strong, and the relevant ecosystem
is
> still viable. However, we felt a responsibility to tell our customers that
> we could see a time coming when we would no longer be able to sell and
> support HP e3000 systems in the way our customers have come to expect.  In
> the role of trusted advisor to our installed base, HP has decided to act
> proactively, and advise customers to begin planning a migration to other
HP
> platforms, now, while there's time to formulate orderly transition plans
> with as little impact as possible upon their businesses.
>
> Announcements such as this one are never easy to make.  But sometimes
> business conditions make them necessary.  For almost 30 years, the HP
e3000
> has been one of the industry's most robust, reliable platforms.
> Hewlett-Packard has continually evolved HP e3000 technology, enabling our
> customers to keep pace with current technology, while simultaneously
> providing backwards compatibility for the legacy technologies that
customers
> have used to run their businesses. There's no question that the HP e3000
has
> been one of the great success stories of the industry.
>
> We recognize that the HP e3000 is a valuable part of your business, and we
> wish that it were possible for us to continue selling and supporting the
HP
> e3000 forever.  But ultimately, the HP e3000 business is exactly that - a
> business.  And sometimes, we are all forced to make business decisions
that
> we may not like.
>
> Hewlett-Packard continues to be committed to its customers, and we really
do
> want to earn your continued business and partnership.  This is why will
sell
> and enhance the HP e3000 until 10/31/2003, and support it until
12/31/2006.
> It's why we're extending the support life of older HP e3000 platforms and
> versions of MPE/iX.  It's why we have made conversion kits available for
> converting HP e3000s to HP 9000s.  For a-class and n-class servers, these
> kits are free.  It's also why HP and its partners have put together a
> package of services to help customers make the transition to servers based
> on HP-UX, Windows or Linux.
>
> I recognize that we are asking you to make a difficult transition.  But if
> we continue to work together, I'm sure we can find a way to get through
the
> transition.  On behalf of the Hewlett-Packard Company, I'd like to thank
you
> for the support you have given HP and the HP e3000.  There is a great deal
> more information about the announcement available on the web at
> http://www.hp.com/products1/mpeixservers/future/index.html.  I hope we can
> continue to work together in the future...
>
>
>
>   George C. Stachnik
> HP - CSY M/S 47-UY
> 19447 Pruneridge Ave
> Cupertino, CA 95014 USA
>
> Email:[log in to unmask]
> Phone:(408) 447-7456 (Vmail)
> (408) 447-4278 (fax)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Randall:
>
> Thank you for taking the time to send HP your comments. They have been
> forwarded to the appropriate people within Hewlett-Packard for their
> information or action. Should more clarification or information be
> needed, you may be contacted directly.
>
> Your input is important to us and very much appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> HP Executive Communications
>
>

 ========================================================================
My final response:
 ========================================================================


Mr. Stachnik,

    I thank you for your response about the e3000.  While I understand the
reasons that HP is ending the e3000 line, I do not agree with the factors
causing the e3000's demise.  HP has spent about $3 marketing the e3000
over the last 12 years or so.  During the 70's, the e3000 was a "hobby" for
HP.  It was not part of the core business at the time, and was not
considered important enough to try to market outside of HP's core customers
(ie. those using HP instrumentation, measurement, and office machines).
When HP decided to go to RISC architecture, they put a lot of money and
effort into selling it.  They even tried to advertise to IBM customers.  It
was almost a serious effort to try and sell the e3000 to new customers.  But
then, HP decided that UNIX was the answer to all problems and ever since
then, it has been virtually impossible to find an HP sales representative
who even knows what an e3000 is or does.

    I know this for a fact.  I was in several purchase agreement meetings
during the early 90's at (For the HP List, I have removed the company
names) WWWWWW, Inc., XXXXXX Company, YYYYYY, Inc, and ZZZZZZ.  I was a
consultant working at these various companies between 1989
and 1993.  At each of these meetings, HP, IBM, DEC, and a few others were to
offer their solution proposals for various business applications (personnel,
payroll, general administration/acctg, finance, warehouse/inventory control,
etc.).  In each case, the HP3000 was not ever mentioned.  These are the
applications that the e3000 was designed to perform.  The sales reps always
touted the HP9000.  On a couple of occasions, I asked the sales reps about
the e3000, and both of them gave me a puzzled look and started asking ME
about the machine.  This was 1993, not 2003!  So tell me, what do you think
was the cause of the e3000 losing sales?

    I am beyond sorry to see this machine go.  It actually wouldn't bother
me if I knew it was being replaced by a better solution.  But to be honest,
there is no better solution for business applications than the e3000.  You
don't need an army of people to maintain it.  It doesn't crash on a
daily/weekly/monthly basis.  You can sleep well knowing that all of your
data is free from corruption.

    One last note, and then I will leave you alone:

1)    When was the last time your "low-cost high-volume, standards-based
product" crashed?  I bet you can remember the date because it was within the
last month.  My e3000 hasn't gone down in 5 years.
2)    When was the last time a customer who bought a "low-cost high-volume,
standards-based product" have data loss or corruption due to system errors
or simple power failures?  In the 30 year history of the e3000, of all the
thousands of installed machines, there have been very few reported cases of
data corruption due to operating system errors or power failures.
3)    When you bought your "low-cost high-volume, standards-based product",
did it come with system management tools, or did you have to purchase them
separately?  They come included with the e3000
4)    When you bought your "low-cost high-volume, standards-based product",
did it come with a database management system, or did you have to purchase
it separately?  DBMS is included with the e3000 (IMAGE or ALLBASE)
5)    When you bought your "low-cost high-volume, standards-based product",
did it come with an UPS, or did you have to purchase it separately?  The
e3000 has included 30 minute battery backup since 1972.
6)    How many technicians, DBAs, software engineers, programmers, and
system administrators does it take to manage and operate your "low-cost
high-volume, standards-based product"?  I can tell you that at XXXXXX
Corp, I was the System Manager, Operator, DBA, Hardware Technician, Software
Manager for three HP e3000's with over 600 users and I still spent more than
half my days doing programming on a new corporate purchasing system with 10
other programmers (whom I supervised).
7)    I imagine you have a PC sitting on your desk that runs at 500Mhz or
better, and has at least 128Mb of memory.  The 11 year old e3000 I described
in my earlier email ran at 37Mhz and was able to handle over 200 users
simultaneously accessing over 15Gb of data.  Now, your machine is at least
10 times faster than my old e3000.  What do you think would happen if you
tried to put 2000 users on your PC accessing the disc drives and doing their
daily work?  Okay, how about 200 people?  How about 20?  Now, how does your
"low-cost high-volume, standards-based product" sound now?  I wouldn't even
want 2 people accessing the data on my PC.  You see, HP solved that problem
30 years ago with excellent memory management.  Did you know that on the
e3000, when you read a record from a database, 95% of the time the record
you wanted is already in memory and the disc drive is not accessed at all?
This is called "pre-fetching".  The e3000 knows what record you will want
before you even ask for it.  This way, you are not waiting on your disc
drive.  How many times have you sat at your "low-cost high-volume,
standards-based product" and watched your disc drive light flicker away and
you hear the 'Geiger-counter' sound as you wait for your data to be
retrieved?  This does not happen on my old piece of junk.
8)    How expensive is your "low-cost high-volume, standards-based product"
 now?  If only HP had as much confidence in HP's machine as its customers
do!
    Mr. Stachnik, I know that you did not kill the e3000.  HP did.  And they
started the death spiral over 10 years ago when they started treating it
like an ugly duckling.  I just wanted you and anyone else in HP to know that
they have spent the last 30 years developing a fantastic machine and
operating system.  This machine can still (pardon the expression) KICK ASS
over the so-called "low-cost high-volume, standards-based product".  If HP
has spent just a little time and effort on trying to sell the machine,
instead of pushing it into the closet, we would not be having this
discussion today.

    Thank you for listening to the ramblings of an old e3000 fan.  By the
way, I have been working on the e3000 since 1974.  I have extensive
experience in all facets of its use, operation, and management.  I had hoped
I would retire before the machine did, but it doesn't look like that will
come about.  It's a shame.

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