Art forwarded Winston's reply:

> Reply from [log in to unmask]:
>
> Hi Art,
>
> Our current approach is to use two different types of
> advertising to reach customers.  First, for existing customers,
> we use installed base publications.  We have found this very
> effective at getting our messages directly to customers that
> have already chosen the HP e3000.
>
> For attracting new customers, we use a very focused solution
> based approach.  .......
>
> We have found that using generic industry advertising is not
> effective for us.  To make a real impact it takes a very large
> scale effort and I believe that our investments are better spent
> on continuing to make the HP e3000 the best product it can be.

Winston's above is consistent with previous statements by CSY;
there is no surprise here....  and I don't really have a problem
with what the above is focused on;  as far as it goes.   No doubt
Winston is correct when he says it would take a very large scale,
sustained effort to *significantly* raise the awareness of the
HPe3000 and Image/SQL to the readers of ComputerWorld,
InfoWorld, etc.;  let alone GOLF, Barron's, Newsweek, etc., etc.
Nobody should expect two-full-page multi-color ads on the 3000
and IMAGE every other week in all the major IT trade rags *and*
many of the leading main-stream pubs that get read on airplanes.

...  and I don't think anyone on this list is asking or expecting
that.  It's not necessary;  and is not the fundamental problem we
are dealing with here.  I think Cortlandt put it well:

> OK, but let us be direct.   My problem with HP's marketing
> tactics is that it undercuts my assurances to my clients that
> the HP e3000 belongs in their organizational IT strategy.
> Like the practice of medicine, marketing, should follow the
> motto of "first do no harm".  HP marketing is harmful to the
> HP e3000 market position as well as the credibility of anyone
> who recommends a MPE/iX solution.   It undercuts years of
> brand loyalty to the HP 3000 and to Hewlett-Packard itself.

I.e.:  HP *as a corporation*;  at the highest several levels of
corporate management;  is stating in clear and unambiguous
terms that the company now has three and only three OS that
they consider "strategic" (with all that implies):  HP-UX, NT, and
now LINUX.  That is a *whole 'nother story* from occasionally
or even mostly omitting MPE from PR blurbs on other products:
The obvious deliberate omission of MPE/iX while now including
even an open-source clone of UNIX as strategic ahead of MPE
crystallizes the whole issue.  It doesn't mean MPE is going to
fade away in the next couple years;  it's core mission-critical to
too many businesses yet....  but as Cortlandt said:  Anybody at
a lower level (outside *or* inside HP) trying to sell MPE as a
long-term solution just has NO WAY to get by this fundamental,
official HP corporate message:  HP-UX, NT, and LINUX are
strategic;  MPE/iX is not.

Try and be objective:   Place yourself in the position of a CIO
trying to make the right decisions for long-term success of his /
her business:   Even if you are running MPE now, would you
feel comfortable for the long run when the vendor of your OS /
Database just directly and specifically told you (yes:  that is
EXACTLY what HP did) that the OS and database your business
is critically dependent on is NOT strategic ??...  And if you are
NOT running MPE yet, how do you get a long-term plan that has
MPE / IMAGE as the core past the review committee;  after
someone on that committee asks:  "And what is our overall take
on the long-term commitment to MPE and IMAGE of senior
management at the proposed vendor ??...  Answer:  Except in
a few cases where the 3000 currently provides specific best-in-
class solutions, you don't....  In fact, if the CIO is smart, s/he
doesn't even *present* MPE / IMAGE to the corporate review
committee, because they don't want to look stupid / get turned
down...

My take:  The unambiguous message by Corporate HP that
"MPE is NOT strategic" is a serious, big-time problem....  Unless
reversed, the long-term future is NOT bright.  And while it's
probably good to avoid "going to the barricades" if possible, I
find myself in full agreement with Gavin's last:

> In this case, the higher authority is the shareholders, analysts,
> and journalists at large.  The best way to complain to *them* is
> not to send a QueryCalc poster to Carly, but to run a full-page
> "open letter to Carly" in some national publication.

Yup....  INFOWORLD would be my vote....

SIDEBAR:  Like Birket mentioned, that does not preclude doing
the other things to....  My off-the-top for a "Card to Carly" is
something like:

"We like the HP 3000 that you invented 25 years ago so much
that we took out a full-page ad in INFOWORLD to tell you."

.....  signed by everybody who contributes to the ad (stand and
be counted time (except for current CSY employees; who should
obviously be allowed to contribute anonymously if they wish..
;-)   ) ).

> If we did come up with the money to do a full page "open
> letter" in a national publication, then in addition to annoying
> Carly it would almost certainly generate some calls from
> publications like Infoworld who will be interested in knowing
> what the whole story is.

That is the key:  Even if 100 of us badger INFOWORLD to cover
the 3000 like they did the AS/400, it may just go in the "one of
these days" folder along with the other hundreds of requests
they must get every day....   But if the end-users of a system
that senior HP management is ignoring go to what would be
fairly unprecedented lengths to *pay out of their own pockets*
for a big ad...  well,....  that should get the INFOWORLD and
maybe etc. "news departments" spun up at least a little bit;  and
then as Gavin said THEY will ask Carly, and she will be hard put
not to respond (let's hope it's the right response (no guarantee) ).

> So, in my opinion, only a full page "open letter" in a national,
> well known publication is going to have any significant effect.
> Anything less can be ignored the same way that all other
> complaints seem to be.  You certainly won't win any friends at
> HP by running such an ad, but you certainly will have an
> impact.

Yup....  and I think it can still be done in a fairly "nice" way;  i.e.:
while not avoiding the issue, we don't have to call any HP exec a
"scurvy, low down so-and-so" or etc....

> Just the fact that the 3000 community has done such a thing
> when none of their other customers ever felt the need to do
> such a thing means that there is clearly something that needs
> to be fixed.'

Yup again.....    Then Wayne stepped up to the plate:

> At last count there were a little over 1000 subscribers to
> HP3000-L.  If each of us contributed $37, that would provide
> the $37,000 Denys said would be needed for a full page black
> and white ad.  If someone will coordinate this campaign, I'll be
> glad to send in my $37.

I will see your $37 and raise you $63 for starters;  i.e: Go for the
round number:  $100...   since I expect not everyone on 3000-L
will be able to contribute, $100 sounds about right to me....  and
it takes time and effort to "collect and collate" contributions...
even if it is done on the web.  If at least a few third-party vendors
on the list who can deduct this as a business expense were to
kick in a little more, maybe we could even go for a full-page one-
color ad in INFOWORLD.....     ;-)

Anyway, I commit to contributing at least $100 to the cause....
hmmm....  any chance an established corporate member of this
list who is already a "credit card expert" could and would set up
a secure web site;  where we could all punch in our credit card
numbers ??...   If 500 members contribute an average of $100,
that's $50K right there;  that would buy a good ad in
INFOWORLD (given the urgency, I'm willing to gamble that none
of the "usual suspects" will pull a "SUPERGROUP" with the $$$..
   ;-))   ).

How about it, Sports Fans:  Can we get $50K or so together in
time to hit INFOWORLD with a full-page ad before HPW ??...

Ken Sletten