I'll take that one. When one talks about the HP 3000, one actually means
both the MPE operating system and the HP 3000 series xxx hardware. They go
together like Abbott and Costello. You just do not have one without the
other. When people mention the reliability of the HP 3000, some confusion
may ensue. Does the person mean the reliability of the hardware or the
reliability of the software? Actually it is both. If you had an excellent
OS on substandard hardware, it would not be a reliable system. Conversely,
if you had magnificent hardware running a so-so OS, you would also not have
a reliable system. It is my belief the HP 3000 has achieved its legendary
reliability in great measure because MPE has been married to top notch,
expensive and carefully selected hardware (apart from HP-IB and the HP7976
:).) After all, you do not go down to the local "Server Parts Emporium,"
and buy a generic SCSI controller for the HP 3000 in a bag, without a
maker's name on it.
So, when someone started on a tangent about MS putting out unreliable
software, someone else responded about Intel hardware. For the same reason
that MPE means an HP 3000, many people think Microsoft and Intel, or the
derogatory term Wintel. This is, of course, a slap in the face for AMD, but
so what? The vast majority of NT Servers run on Intel CPUs. However, there
are numerous NT Servers where parts were actually acquired from such places
as the above-mentioned emporium. These parts come in bags, with no
discernable maker names and certainly little or no support. When the server
crashes, instantly the blame is placed on Microsoft.
Earlier in this or another thread someone mentioned that MS was putting out
release after release in an attempt to make something work. On the other
hand, MPE didn't have to do that, because it works fine. I am paraphrasing
here, but I think that was the gist of the post.
Well, perhaps that's true, but consider that when Windows NT was first
released about 8 years ago, if memory serves, there were no such things as
Ultra SCSI, LVD SCSI, fibre channel, CD-RW, USB, useful laptops, PC cards,
CF cards, digital cameras that could connect to something, AGP, Pentium II,
Pentium III, P4 and Itanium, DVD, gigabyte disk drives, and I am skipping a
lot of new technologies. In the least several years since its initial
release, NT has acquired all these technologies and will soon support
Bluetooth, FireWire and USB 2.0. When Windows 95 came out, six years ago, a
lot of the technology enumerated earlier still did not exist. All this to
say that new releases are brought out and purchased because they support new
hardware technologies (toys.) Just try to use USB on Windows 95 or Windows
NT 4.0.
It is only since MPE gained access to the PCI architecture, itself over 8
years old, that MPE gained access to more current mainstream devices running
on LVD SCSI, way late. It is a shame PCI took so long to appear on the 3000.
I understand it was quite an effort and it was very well executed, but it
was so very late.
Kind regards,
Denys. . .
Denys Beauchemin
HICOMP
(800) 323-8863 (281) 288-7438 Fax: (281) 288-7438
denys at hicomp.com www.hicomp.com
-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Johnson, Tracy
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The Real Story About HP's Announcement...
Jim says something about MS software and
John changes the subject to Intel hardware.
Why?
Tracy Johnson
MSI Schaevitz Sensors
>Jim McCoy writes:
>> I guess they learned the lesson of MS quite well
John Pollard writes:
>What is so "unreliable" about Intel based hardware?
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
