> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Phillips [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:29 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: migration
>
>
> We are continuing to develop on the 3000, whilst examining migration
> alternatives.  However, I really, really, like "Plan B From
> AICS", which is
> to stay on the 3000 for the next 20 to 25 years using boxes
> and parts from
> the reseller chain.
>
> This buys us time to see what OpenMPE can do.  Plus we still get the
> functionality in that those pesky users want.  Plus it will
> probably be
> cheaper in the long run to buy used boxes and stockpiling
> them to keep our
> systems running.
>

I have had a nagging thought about the OpenMPE idea, what about the
development tools?

As I understand it the compilers use a shared source between the 3000 and
9000. Is HP going to be willing to give OpenMPE access to source code of a
product that they are still supporting and enhancing?

I cringe at the thought of using a 'compatible' cobol compiler created to
replace the HP one, and then trying to find all the subtle bugs it would
introduce. It is hard enough to maintain 15 year old cobol code without
throwing in that kind of nightmare.

HP's program of "strategic neglect" seems to have been most successful in
the development tools area. By making it difficult to develop native 3000
applications, HP gave many vendors the final push off the platform. OpenMPE
must reverse this if there is any hope in reviving the platform, or are they
just aiming to extend its life?

Comments are my own.. not my employer's.. etc.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *