Ron,
 
I couldn't agree with you more. One of the most difficult things for good
technologists to do is separate their love for the technology and the business
needs and requirements. Certainly the HP3000 will support many current and
future business needs. On the other hand, other platforms may provide better
functionality for differing and changing business requirements.
 
kevin leininger
devtech associates
===================
To: HP3000-L @ UTCVM.UTC.EDU (Multiple recipients of list HP3000-L) @ Internet
cc:  (bcc: Kevin Leininger/DevTech Associates)
From: rseybold @ ZILKER.NET (Ron Seybold) @ Internet
Date: 07/27/96 10:56:27 AM
Subject: Re: HP3000/Unix list
 
Hello Friends:
 
Thomas A Harmon said:
 
"It does seem inevitable that the HP3000 and MPE are becoming "mature"
products. It's not what I want either, but it just seems to be going that
way!"
 
It's up to all of us -- the press, customers and the 3000's supporters
inside HP -- to change the definition of "mature" back to its original
intent: stable, reliable products with no need for fiddling. Defining an
entire platform as "mature" in the pejorative sense is going to fail if we
resist the old definition. We all do that by thinking of our 3000s as
vital, growing resources in our companies.
 
I'd recommend mature products anyday over immature ones. The former
increase productivity. The latter only increase expectations.
 
Ron Seybold, Editor In Chief
The 3000 NewsWire
Independent Information to Maximize Your HP3000
[log in to unmask]
512-331-0075