Previously I posted a short war story that described an existing
HP 3000 customer who has the feeling that HP isn't supporting
the platform (3k,MPE/iX) and that HP is making strong hints
that the HP 3000 will go away soon.

There have been many good comments on this posting, but I want
to add some additional points:

1. I don't believe the HP 3000 is going away soon. HP just gave a 5
   year plan, and I can see an additional 5 years at least. I can't
   remember where, but I have been hearing good things about HP 3000
   sales for this fiscal year. This is not a dead platform. Not by
   a long shot. If it was I would not bother to post these messages!

2. Tool vendors (like DISC for example, good post Terry!) depend more
   on new system sales than application vendors. I cannot dispute Terry
   and troop's conclusions. However, these don't apply to every type
   of software company, particularly application s/w.

3. Application vendors depend on the manufacturer (HP in this case)
   to continue to position the h/w solution as viable in the
   marketplace. Viable is not 'bleeding edge'. Viable is stable,
   good price performance, enduring, evolving, supported.

4. Application vendors (like us) don't need lots of publicity for
   the platform. What we need is a consistent, focused, upbeat
   position statement from all areas of HP.

5. Lets get real. I have been selling s/w for the HP 3000 since 1980
   and I have NEVER seen HP be proactive in the marketplace in
   pushing the HP 3000. This is not a recent phenomenom. It is not their
   strength and never will be. I just want to make sure they do a good
   job addressing #4 above.

So in conclusion:

a. Lets praise HP for the following:

   - good job increasing the sales for the HP 3000.
   - trying to present a more consistent and upbeat message.
   - sharing a 5 year plan with their customers.

b. And lets encourage HP:

   - to continue working on getting the message out regarding the HP 3000.
   - to continue working on evolving the platform intelligently and
     cost effective so we can still have the best performing general
     purpose business computer for the money
    (that addresses our real needs).



Duane Percox ([log in to unmask]  v/650.306.1608 f/650.365.2706)
http://www.qss.com/          http://qwebs.qss.com/qwebs
http://qwebs.qss.com/faq3k