>I was wondering how many others viewed the slick presentation on "Defining
>the New Enterprise", broadcast this morning (Wed.) around the world by HP.
>Not a single mention of the 3000, or even a _hint_ by anyone involved, that
>HP knew about any operating environment other than UNIX or NT. Rich Sevcik
>(sp?) even used "mission critical" and UNIX in the same sentence!!! I
>thought "mission critical" was the forte of the 3000. Shouldn't Rich know
>better?
>
>And they wonder why the 3000 community seems to be concerned about the
>future....
 
Please don't lose site of the fact that HP is very large company and
they have many different divisions. That presentation was intended to
focus on the new pa-8000/Unix offerings and was orchestrated by GSY.
I would not expect them to discuss anything else.
 
To get a good feeling for HP's position on all this I would suggest
everyone read the interview with Glenn Osaka in the latest 3000 NewsWire.
 
It should be no secret that:
 
1. HP is doing its best to keep the 3000 active and meeting the needs
   of the installed base of 3000 shops.
 
2. It is very difficult to recruit software for any proprietary platform
   given the volume scaling that exists for Unix/NT.
 
3. HP (and most of the industry) has a strategy of Unix for the large
   enterprise and NT for the small/medium. This is where the market is
   spending its money.
 
4. The 3000 has at least 10 years of momentum left in it. Not bad for
   a 25 yr old system that has always been a niche player.
 
For myself, I have stopped interpeting each HP presentation as the demise of
the 3000 because it wasn't mentioned. I just don't think its always relevent
to the presentation at hand.
 
 
Duane Percox ([log in to unmask]  v/415.306.1608 f/415.365.2706)
http://www.qss.com/          http://www.qss.com/qwebs
http://www.qss.com/faq3k     http://www.qss.com/qsdk