DSilva,

I couldn't help notice the subject line about HP people in this forum.
Obviously, you aren't completely cognizant of the make up of this forum, are
you?  There are numerous HPites lurking with the shadows of this list - and
they are also frequent contributors.  The problem is that with this current
thread, I don't think it would be wise for them to "chime in" - one way or
the other.  I suspect that there will be quiet contributions from some, but
anonymity is crucial.

As for the systems you mention, let me take a stab at it...

I am assuming that you are talking about the internal HP systems - and not
the HP MPE operating system, and certainly not the vendor applications which
are supported on the HP 3000 platform.  The platform is A-One in my book.
The applications that exist are quality applications - there just aren't
enough of them (yet).  The utilities are exceptional (especially when
compare against the "other operating systems").  Many of the HP Solutions
that are enjoyed in the UNIX world actually are the beneficiary of untold
hours of work and testing on the MPE PA-RISC architecture.

I have "been there" (as a consultant internally to HP).  Much of what I know
can't be divulged because of the non-disclosure agreements that are in place
between HP and its contracting firms.  However, I agree that their internal
systems were / are badly in need of an overhaul.  In many of the sites the
documentation isn't readily available.  Some of the software was written in
the 70's (before the advent of structured coding techniques) - which by
their very nature make debugging difficult.  But, I have also seen the other
side of the "new" HP internal IT departments.  The UNIX systems that are
being implemented are consuming a vastly disproportionate share of the
budget - simply to get up and keep up.  It is not always a case of newer
being better just because it has more bells and whistles.  The reason that
so much of the internal HP applications are running (even today) is that
they were well written for their time - and they aren't broke (they just
don't have all the nuances that is "deemed crucial to surviving in the new
commerce").

The correct answer for HP - and for many other firms considering a
migration - might have been (rather than scrap everything and start on a
whole new platform) to update the current software with "new interfaces",
re-write the current systems (which would probably have proven cheaper than
the investment in new technology, people and programming that they are
having to make), or migrate an existing solution (from a vendor who would
stand behind the migration 100% and who could / would see the long term
market potential and benefits of cross-platform migration).  The savings in
knowledge capital and hardware investment would probably pay for itself in
relatively short order - and would be a magnitude of savings over current /
alternate solutions being implemented.

As for antiquated technologies... just because you have a cell phone and a
"rotary dial phone" by your desk doesn't mean that it's appropriate to use
the cell phone all the time.  For one, it's more costly (see the
comparison?).  For another, the technological advance buys you nothing
except an additional layer where problems could surface.

The MPE operating system is capable of virtually every application and
solution that UNIX (or Linux or AS/400) can handle.  It is also less costly
to maintain (hardware, software, and people wise).  It is "newer" than
UNIX... and is actually more user friendly.  Quick (without looking), how
many UNIX commands are there that don't have a "meaningfully named"
comparable command within MPE?  It is completely web-ready.  It handles
virtually every "language" you want to throw at it (including C++)...
 Oops - did someone say Visual-Basic?  Oh well, you can't provide
everything...

One of the other problems that has occurred within HP (and within many
companies migrating from the MPE arena) has been the influx of UNIX and
Windows trained people fresh from the world of academia (no offense intended
to Jeff or Ted).  These new recruits in IT, accounting, purchasing, and
management have never seen the power of the HP 3000, have not explored the
capabilities of the machine.  The software's not classy (state-of-the-art),
so lets dump the whole thing... hardware platform and all.

I think you get my drift.  I have been there... I have seen the animal...
and I prefer the owl.

Glenn Koster
Quintessential School Systems
Developers of QWEBS (www.qss.com)

My opinions... not [necessarily] that of my employer.