VM was/is  definitely Virtual Machine. This was the first operating system
with which I ever worked. I thought it was pretty good until I started to
work with MPE V. What a relief no more "GO dots" or strange 360 JCL
programs; just program for content and issue a few commands and the job
runs.

Joseph "still trying to figure out how I got so lucky" Rosenblatt

-----Original Message-----
From:   HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Neil Armstrong
Sent:   Monday, January 29, 2001 2:04 PM
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        Re: [HP3000-L] ot: Sobeys bails out of SAP

Virtual Machine. I believe.

Neil

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Sielaff" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: ot: Sobeys bails out of SAP


> Was VM Virtual Memory or Virtual Machine?
> Just Curious in Moses Lake
> Gary
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Darnell" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 4:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] ot: Sobeys bails out of SAP
>
>
> > Wayne,
> >
> > I have seen HP literature that states we will see HP-UX, Linux, and NT
> > running on the same HP hardware (even concurrently on the same box),
with
> > hints that MPE will be ported to that platform as well.  Four processor
> box.
> > I haven't looked that far into the architecture, so I cannot say how
> tightly
> > or loosely coupled the processors are, what's common between the
instances
> > of operating systems, etc.
> >
> > Now, remember VM/370?  It could handle multiple "regions" each running
an
> > IBM 370-ish operating system. There was about a 20% performance cost for
> > running under VM, I believe.
> >
> > -dtd
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wayne R. Boyer [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > > Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2001 2:27 PM
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: ot: Sobeys bails out of SAP
> > >
> > >
> > > re: "... the HP3000 is hardware.  SAP is software."
> > >
> > > The thing is, many many HP-3000 people refer/consider the
> > > HP-3000 to be a
> > > package of hardware and software.  It is but for non-3000
> > > people, I personaly
> > > try to say "MPE/iX" a lot instead of HP-3000.  That gets "I
> > > dont know what
> > > you are talking about" type responses but it avoids the "HP-3000 = old
> > > technology" mindset.  Then I can explain that the HP-3000
> > > hardware equals
> > > HP-9000 hardware and thus I have my audience now thinking
> > > that HP-3000 might
> > > just equal new technology hardware.  The next step is to
> > > equate MPE/iX with
> > > HP-UX as alternative OS's on the same HW platform.  Now if
> > > only HP would
> > > provide us with a software switch so we can run both OS's on
> > > one physical
> > > box... how about both OS's at the SAME time using diff disc
> > > drives???  Am I
> > > dreaming again?
> > >
> > > Wayne Boyer
> > >
>