Um, well, gee, thanks... I feel kinda embarrassed now.

But glad to sing the praises of the 3K. In fact, our big client had to
go live with an LAN-based version of our product, while we hunted down a
rather nasty connectivity problem. Now that we think that we have
resolved this (and would you believe, it was apparently a bad cable!),
and are stress testing the connection, they are asking for a comparison
of running against an NT (file) server versus running on the 3000 as
application and database server (the two versions are designed rather
differently at this time).

Let's see. Both servers are dual processor, so I'm not sure quite what
to say there. Our 3K has mirrored disks, and private volume sets for a
given business application. It's a mature platform with high
availability, but embracing some of the newer standards. IMAGE offers
integrity, and is a DBMS, with great tools available to maintain it
(thanks, Adager and Robelle!), whereas the LAN's ISAM files have much
less cohesion between and among their structures, and probably cannot
handle four GB worth of data (and this is a big client). Response time
for the application on the 3K is profoundly better, from complex
transactions taking seconds on NT to don't blink or you'll miss it on
the 3K. I have been told that our 3000 will support more concurrent
connections than an NT server is likely to handle. When 64 bit happens,
HP has had the experience of doubling bitness while keeping more things
the same than MS did.

But, I don't feel like I'm covering everything relevant; maybe I'll do
better starting fresh in the morning. But suggestions are welcome, on
list or off.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Brown [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 1998 5:13 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      [HP3000-L] Good guy award nomination
>
> Here's part of what Greg Stigers had to say about the HP 3000 on an NT
> list, in
> response to whether folks should adopt NT 5.0 when it first comes out.
> Good
> show!
>
> -Bob
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]