Wirt Atmar wrote:

> If you're going to run a unix-like application under a hierarchical file
> system, posix-dominated environment, addressing a "mainstream" dbms, why
> bother with a 3000 at all? At that point, all you have left of the original
> HP3000 is the power cord and the nameplate -- but those two items alone will
> cost you a great deal more than if your nameplate said 9000 instead, and
> would only be a fair-to-poor emulation of the environment you wanted in the
> first place.

i don't know that i agree with you...but i do understand your point.

i'm certainly not advocating the of dumping image -- quite the contrary.  i want
to see image grow and improve.  but in the meantime i'm...tired to
death....worried....scared....about the number of vendors leaving the 3000
because their customers want to use an industry-recognized database.  or they're
leaving because they can't find any programmers *willing* to work on a 3000.  we
all know this song....  i'm also worried about the pointy-haired types that
uproot perfectly good mpe applications because they're not using the
database-of-the-month.

i know it's not a popular way to think.  i know that you may not get the kind of
performance we're used to.  but how long is mpe going to stay viable if the only
thing that runs on it is custom-written applications??              - d

--
Donna Garverick     Sr. System Programmer
925-210-6631        [log in to unmask]

>>>MY opinions, not Longs Drug Stores'<<<