HP3000-L Archives

February 1999, Week 4

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:
Denys Beauchemin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 08:34:44 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (77 lines)
X-no-Archive:yes
Alfredo, you are comparing apples and oranges here.  When you migrate from
MPE-V to MPE/iX, you move your applications from one box to another.  The
article you pointed out deals with people migrating from Windows 95/98 to
Windows 2000, on the same box.  Not the same thing at all, as you well
know.

I believe the challenge would have been significantly more complicated for
MPE if the migration from V to XL occurred on the same box. In the case of
95->2000 migration, if you move your applications to a new machine, a la
3000, you will have an easy time migrating.  This new machine could very
well be the same one you are currently using but you have wiped out the
disk and are starting afresh.  This is what I did with my laptop and I have
had no problems.

Think of it this way: Migrating from Windows 3.x to Windows 95 was akin to
going from MPE-IV to MPE-V/P or in some cases MPE-V/R.  Migrating from 3.x
or 9x to NT 4.0 or Windows 2000 is like going to MPE-IV or MPE/V to MPE/iX.
And migrating from Windows NT 3.5x and 4.0 to Windows 2000 will be like
going from MPE/iX 5.0 or 5.5 to MPE/iX 6.0.

The big issue for the folks mentioned in the story is the number of
desktops they have to deal with.  If there were only one or two or a few
dozens (like one or two or a few dozen classic HP 3000), the migration
would not be an issue, but when you are talking thousands and tens of
thousands of desktops, the issue multiplies.  What a lot of companies do is
prepare a prototype desktop with the target OS and when it is tuned the way
the want it, the can quickly clone it to other desktops.  This is what most
of these people will ultimately do.  Of course, this method only works if
your desktops are all the same to begin with.

One thing the story doesn't talk about is servers.  If you want to compare
Windows 2000 to MPE, you must do this at the server level.  The migration
from NT 3.51 or 4.0 to Windows 2000 is not an issue, so the story nor you
mention it.


Kind regards,

Denys. . .

Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP America, Inc.
(800) 323-8863  (281) 288-7438         Fax: (281) 355-6879
denys at hicomp.com                             www.hicomp.com



-----Original Message-----
From:   F. Alfredo Rego [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Wednesday, 24 February, 1999 3:52 AM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Inevitable migration to NT (err... Windows 2000)

The last paragraph says, "Ultimately, users will have to move from Windows
95 and 98 to Windows 2000" and previous paragraphs mention the bright side:

http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/CWFlash/990219page1

How does this compare to your experiences regarding MPE upgrades on the
HP3000?  My experiences regarding MPE and the HP3000 have been excellent.


Enjoy,

 _______________
|               |
|               |
|            r  |  Alfredo                     mailto:[log in to unmask]
|          e    |                                  http://www.adager.com
|        g      |  F. Alfredo Rego                       +1 208 726-9100
|      a        |  Manager, R & D Labs               Fax +1 208 726-2822
|    d          |  Adager Corporation
|  A            |  Sun Valley, Idaho 83353-3000                   U.S.A.
|               |
|_______________|

ATOM RSS1 RSS2