Jeff
Once again here I sit in my easy chair reading the thread and am compelled
to add my 2 cents worth. So here it goes...
(remember I'm from New York so my language might be a bit to straight
forward for some readers out in the boon docks). First and foremost I'd
like to thank you for your continued support of our ever loved MPE
environment. While some out there might see the announcement from Mike as
good and bad, I see it as good and good. I go back to HP's infamous "WHAT
IF" campaign. What if HP said to the community "screw you, MPE is ours and
we will not license it to anyone for any reason. Period". Legally that
would be in HP's right but thanks to the hard work of Jon Backus, the board
of OPENMPE and people like yourself, we still have a leg to stand on.
I'm still sore about some of the comments that have been made by some HPers
... two statements come to mind ... Raj saying to computer world that all
has quieted down in the MPE world....Bull sh... And of course the wonderful
statements Winny (Winston Prather) saying "it was my decision and mine
alone" come to mind.
Having said that, some "roadblocks" are a necessary evils to satisfy some
wealthy HP lawyer(s) however from my perspective If you let MPE live in some
form or another would satisfy my needs. After all isn't that what all of us
are really striving for. If MPE runs on an HP3000 box, HPUX box or an
HP/Intel platform and the performance, reliability and functionality are all
up to par then lets go with it and give HP the measly 500 bucks. (The
hardware is not the issue here, the OS is) After all if a customer has to
purchase 10 copies of MPE to satisfy their individual needs, I'm sure you
could find $5000 in your respective budgets and still not break the bank.
If it does then maybe chapter 11 might be an alternative.
Zelik
PS What about IMAGE ?????? I've heard allot of talk about MPE but little or
no mention of Image. Is this the way HP (or Alegro/SRI) will finally
unbundle Image from MPE. MPE without Image is useless. Alfredo if you are
reading this please feel free to comment
PPS The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent
those of my employer or any other party I am affiliated with.
-----Original Message-----
From: VANCE,JEFF (HP-Cupertino,ex1) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 5:29 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: MPE/iX Licensing and Distribution for an Emulated
Environment
Paul wrote:
...
> So let's take what we have and make the best of it. Yes, HP
> is putting roadblocks in front of us, making this more
> difficult to do. Sure, remember that when you are approached to
> buy HP9000 computers, personal computers and printers, but
> let's move forward. We have an emulator to get to market.
I see it (quite) differently. HP is trying to take away roadblocks.
The largest roadblock so far has been that the current MPE license
allows MPE to only run on an e3000 platform. If HP did nothing to
address this there would be no legal way for a PA-RISC emulator
to run MPE, MPE subsystems, or MPE tools and apps. So, I do not
see HP as putting roadblocks in front of you. I do know that what
we have proposed for a new MPE license is not perfect at all. I
know there are some restrictions that are unfavorable to the
emulator vendors and will make things a little more complicated
for the end users. However, you need to realize that we(HP) did
not say "hummm, this seems too good for everyone, let's try to
mess it up some. Let's add some unnecessary roadblocks so that
there is a smaller chance of anyone wanting to create a PA-RISC
emulator." This entire processes was aimed at being able to allow
emulator vendors to go forwards with a business and technical
analysis, not having to worry if the legal license issues would
prevent them from making a business out of selling an emulator.
Thus, we intend to sell an MPE license divorced from e3000 h/w, at a
very low price, so that the license and its price are not be a deterrent
for anyone considering purchasing an emulator.
regards,
Jeff Vance, HP
|
