Dave Gale writes:

>Now i fall in to the tangled web of non-interactive conversation and the
fact that I am not the greatest writer on the planet.
>
>I agree with the comment that as 3Ks move to standardized periferals, there
is now the need for an UPS as part of the system. However, I am the helpless
romantic and of course the HP3K will always  be viewed as the great machine
(at least from this point of view) it has been. Not the 'as quickly as we
can forget it' machine HP seems to have forgotten.
>
>I know there is a trade off for using standardized periferals, but the
trade off here seems to interfere with one of the 3K's main points.
>
>We also have an NT on the network, but for what it's worth, this helpless
romantic prefers the good ol' 3K that comes back from a powerfail as if it
never happended.

I have always had similar feelings as you describe. It was really an eye
opener for me to see that with the correct configuration our NT system
could hold up to what I always held as the best powerfail recovery
in the industry.

In fact, since we had the optional NT driver (PowerChute) installed we
had an even better recovery on NT then the hp3k system.

I posted the message not to slam the hp3k or anything like that, but to
show that we might be sometimes acting a little closed minded about
other systems not being as good as the hp3k.

duane percox