Oh, I have been /Plugged. :-)
John,
I have no problem with you pitching Quest software on the list. This is an
excellent place for it. However, as a point of netiguette, there is a
convention called a "plug alert" that let's people know they are about to be
hit with a bit of advertising.
If you put "Plug Alert" in the subject line, the people who are filtering their
e-mail, can generally parse faster.
That being said.
<Plug>
I have personally used Quest Netbase software and think it is an excellent
solution for homesteaders that may be interested in fault tolerance and high
availablity.
</Plug>
Regards,
-Craig
EchoTech, Inc
--- John Saylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> We here at Quest Software have seen an upswing in HA solutions and clustered
> 3K's. It looks like homesteading is the trend and
> shoring up the availability and horizontal growth is appealing to customers.
> It seem their management wants to feel secure about
> staying on the platform for now. Many customers have capacity but are looking
> to provide Disaster Recovery, High-Availability and
> expanded growth capabilities. Real-time replication lends itself to all these
> solutions as well as integration into the new technologies
> by forwarding the needed information to front-end web servers or new
> applications. As the world surrounding the 3K's changes the back-end
> reliability does not. It is a stable platform and with Quest Software we have
> the ability to insure the reliability and up time. So there should
> be no worries for these servers for years to come. Many customers have
> clustered multiple servers together to perform the work required and
> cut software costs tremendously by dedicating a server to a specific
> application of business function.
>
> If you would like further discussions or information please contact me or
> send me an e-mail.
>
> John Saylor
> Quest Software
> 1-800-306-9329 x8422
> [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Tont [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 8:44 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Customer Eval
>
>
> I don't think it is so much the expense of keeping the 3000 running. That
> is the easy part because the reliability and the low cost of replacement
> parts if needed. I think the expensive part (at least in the eyes of a CEO
> or CFO) is the risk of losing the company's competitive advantage. For
> example: a manufacturing company using a software package (lets just use
> ManMan for this example) is not only facing a platform that will eventually
> be outdated in the ability to keep up with transactions per second (compared
> to what is available on other platforms) but also faces the problem of using
> a solution that has limited updates. Yes, the machine still does what it
> was purchased to do (and still does it well) - and yes, the software with
> all the tweeks and custom code works for the organization; however, the
> market and technology change faster than we would sometimes like. Just
> doing what has always been done simply because it works is a death wish.
> The competition (especially in manufacturing) is always looking for ways to
> speed up transactions, increase the network bandwidth, process decision
> making reports faster (sometimes several hours faster) and to increase
> productivity based on all the above. The cost of another platform and even
> the cost of a new application is small compared to the possible cost of
> closing the business due to not being able to keep up with the competition.
> I know it sounds awful to say "you should keep up with the Jones'" but to an
> extent it is true. Okay, yes we offer a total ERP/MRP solution that runs
> on HP-UX but I came from the 3000 world and can honestly say that the always
> up - always on message carries over to HP-UX. We have helped customers make
> the move and it is not as painful or costly as one might think (with a good
> plan). And yes, the 3000 can still run in the background if it makes
> everyone feel better or to keep historical data. The point I am trying to
> make is that you have to stay competitive to keep the overall cost of doing
> business manageable. The HP3000 users I spoke with at HPWORLD said they
> would run the 3000 till the bolts fell off and I can appreciate that;
> however the few C-Level (CEO/CFO) people I spoke with are concerned about
> the risk of doing that. I think there is a serious difference of viewpoints
> at the different levels of the organization. Is this based on experience,
> fear or concern? I am open to other viewpoints.
>
> Tom Tont
> The Newman Group
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Lee" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Customer Eval
>
>
> > I don't understand what could be expensive about keeping a 3000 running?
> >
> > John Lee
> > Vaske Computer Solutions
> >
> > :
> > >Gavin writes:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> But for most people it *isn't* a long term solution. Ultimately most
> will
> > >> move to something else, but many will do it only because they're
> forced to
> > >> by changes in their business or because they can't afford to keep the
> 3000
> > >> running any more. Quite a few (many of the smaller customers) will
> > finally
> > >> make the transition catastrophically when the 3000 dies and can't be
> > >> resurrected, or the backup tapes can't be read, or it turns out that
> the
> > >> last backup was done in 1995 :-)
> > >
> >
> > >
> > >
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
