At  05:20 PM 8/12/00, Cortlandt Wilson wrote:
> > Linux joins HP's own Unix operating system and
> > Microsoft's Windows 2000
> > as the company's third strategic operating system.
>
>Which means that MPE/iX is a "non-strategic" OS.     I don't know
>about others but I find the "non-strategic" label ominous - especially
>when HP doesn't explain what it means by "strategic".
>
>IMO to assume that others will have your understanding of the word
>"strategic" evidences a poor grasp of English.

I disagree.  The words "strategic" and "strategy" share the same root.  It
seems pretty clear to me.  Perhaps that's because I spent so many hours in
my youth playing games of strategy and tactics from companies like Avalon
Hill.  I've learned that I generally enjoy games that are more about
strategy (the big picture) than tactics (all the details of getting
there).  Tactics are how one fights a battle.  Strategy is how one wins the
war.

I think that means that HP's upper management (but thankfully not the great
folks in CSY) sees Linux, HP-UX and Windows (whatever the flavor du jour
is) as important to "winning" the computer war.  At best I suppose that
relegates MPE to being a pawn to be spent in furthering the important
strategies.  At worst it implies that MPE is considered
irrelevant.  Neither are very comforting thoughts.

--
Jeff Woods
[log in to unmask] (preferred)
[log in to unmask] (work)
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask] (deprecated)
[log in to unmask] (deprecated)


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com