HP3000-L Archives

August 2000, Week 1

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Cortlandt Wilson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Cortlandt Wilson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 4 Aug 2000 21:24:55 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Christine,

At the risk of appearing to beat a dead horse allow me to note a
important contrast between a statement in your email and how Ann
Livermore was quoted in the article.

You wrote that "HP's corporate strategy continues to focus on winning
UNIX, NT and Linux market share."     Sad for the faithful perhaps but
true, the HP 3000 no longer is the number one marketing focus for HP.
That part I understand.    Livermore's comments, however, said nothing
of strategic focus or market share.   As quoted in the article her
comments were categorical:  "we have a multi-operating system
strategy: HP-UX, Linux and NT."    HP-UX, Linux, and NT.   Period.
Full stop.    The simple interpretation of that statement is that
those three, and only those three, operating systems constitute HP's
area of interest.   I find it hard to reconcile to my customers claims
that HP continues to actively develop and support the HP e3000 against
quotes such as the one from Livermore.

Contrast that statement with something like:
For most customers we offer a multi-operating system strategy: HP-UX,
Linux, and NT.  For some vertical markets and the existing HP e3000
customer base we also continue to develop our proprietary MPE/iX
operating system.

Now that is a truly multi-operating systems strategy that offers the
best solution for each customer along with continuity and investment
protection.

- Cortlandt

ATOM RSS1 RSS2