(I'm not sure this follow-up got posted to the list. If it has, sorry for
the duplication.)
 
Duane says:
 
> Please don't lose site of the fact that HP is very large company and
> they have many different divisions. That presentation was intended to
> focus on the new pa-8000/Unix offerings and was orchestrated by GSY.
> I would not expect them to discuss anything else.
>
 
The glossy flyer we received announcing the telecast doesn't mention UNIX
or the 9000
at all (unless my eyes are failing me), let alone that it applies to only
one HP division.
 
I wouldn't expect to receive an invitation to a 9000 event
since we are strictly a 3000 shop, though I suppose it's possible. The
clear impression I got from the flyer was that the telecast was to be
a showcase of HP's vision for the future for their (high end?) computing
products. If I'd known it was strictly a 9000 event, we wouldn't have
attended.
 
 All the flyer talks about is "the HP vision for IT and the Internet" and
how "the PA-8000 provides flexible, robust solutions for a sustainable
future". They go on to announce that "HP will launch a new era of
performance dominance while providing investment protection through 64-bit
PA-8000 board upgrades and full binary compatibility _*across its product
line*_". (I would think the PA-8000 would apply to both the 3000 and 9000
line, just as the current PA technology does now.)
 
Between the statements in the flyer and the content of the presentation, a
general non-IT type would have to conclude (like the President of our
company, who also attended) that:
 
1. The 3000 is not part of HP's future.
2. The 3000 is not considered an Enterprise Computing platform.
3. The 3000 can not, or will not be able to connect to the Internet for the
business world of the future, like you can just "automatically" do with
UNIX and NT.
4. The 64-bit PA-8000 doesn't apply to the 3000 and MPE.
 
>
> To get a good feeling for HP's position on all this I would suggest
> everyone read the interview with Glenn Osaka in the latest 3000 NewsWire.
>
 
Glenn was featured prominently and was very eloquent. It was clearly noted
he was from the Commercial Division (though only those of us in the "know",
know he's the head of the 3000 line). He didn't mention the 3000 or MPE, or
indicate there was anything other than UNIX (and NT) available.
 
>
> It should be no secret that:
>
> 1. HP is doing its best to keep the 3000 active and meeting the needs
>    of the installed base of 3000 shops.
>
> 2. It is very difficult to recruit software for any proprietary platform
>    given the volume scaling that exists for Unix/NT.
>
> 3. HP (and most of the industry) has a strategy of Unix for the large
>    enterprise and NT for the small/medium. This is where the market is
>    spending its money.
>
> 4. The 3000 has at least 10 years of momentum left in it. Not bad for
>    a 25 yr old system that has always been a niche player.
>
> For myself, I have stopped interpeting each HP presentation as the demise
of
> the 3000 because it wasn't mentioned. I just don't think its always
relevent
> to the presentation at hand.
>
 
I agree with all your statements Duane. We were truly left with the
impression that the 3000 is irrelevant, regardless of "the presentation at
hand."
 
Lou