HP3000-L Archives

February 1998, Week 2

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:
Glenn Cole <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
[log in to unmask][log in to unmask]

eXegeSys, Inc.
144 E. 500 S.
Salt Lake City, Ut 84102
Phone: (801)538-0222
Fax: (801)538-022840_9Feb199815:40:[log in to unmask]
Date:
Mon, 9 Feb 1998 16:00:30 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Item Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] WIN NT Performance (was: A journalist wonders...)
Eric Sand writes:

> Just to shed a little light on this NT thread, please refer to an
> article written by Eric Hall over a year ago titled "Station Wagons And
> Operating Systems" in Network Computing Sept. '96. The proof is in the
> pudding!
>
> http://techweb.cmp.com/nc/714/714colhall.html

And wouldn't you know it?  The article even mentions MPE!
(Okay, *very* briefly, and it's not attributed to anyone.)

For those who can't spare the time to read the whole article,
the MPE section reads:

        "If your environment requires near-constant uptime, then look
         to any of the historically mature operating systems:  MVS,
         VMS, and MPE.  Although this may seem somewhat ludicrous on
         the surface, these systems are more robust than anything else
         on the market.  The level of application control and system
         recovery these systems provide is simply unmatched by any
         general-purpose operating system."

Thanks for the pointer, Eric!

--Glenn Cole
  Software al dente, Inc.
  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2