I think there is some things here that need explaining.  HP does not have to
work with us, or anyone, on the subject of MPE.  They can just close it
down.  The fact that they are willing to talk things over with OpenMPE is a
positive step.  Just remember they don't have to do this.

I understand that passions run high about MPE.  I've spent the past 15 years
working on the platform.  I want to see MPE live a long life.  But chest
thumping, stomping of feet, or holding of ones breath till one turns blue
will not make HP move one inch.  We have to move carefully and work with HP.
There, I said it.  Work with HP to get what we want.  We must all be strong
and back those people who HP is willing to talk with about MPE.  That is
where OpenMPE is.  HP is willing to talk to us about MPE.

As a sign of good faith, OpenMPE is willing to sign an NDA agreement.  We
need that agreement to be able to have the discussions about MPE.  Might I
add that in the beginning, we did have a blanket NDA.  Because of the emails
that Ken sent revealing statements made under NDA, we have to go down the
NDA road again.  It doesn't matter whether or not the dialog had nothing of
substance.  The conversation was under NDA and should not have been
revealed.  At that point, HP could have stopped talking to OpenMPE all
together.  They did not.

This is not the time for demanding that HP turn over MPE.  For MPE, HP is
the only game in town.  They have the ball.  We have to work with them to
let us play with that ball.  We as a community want the same thing.  Let us
regain our focus and stand behind the OpenMPE Board.  Play an active roll in
this discussion with HP.  I'm not defending HP and their actions.  But, HP
is the one in control here.  We must never forget that.  This is about
giving everyone involved what they want.  This is politics.


Ron Horner
Legacy Systems Supervisor
ronh@ladyremingtonjewelry
Lady Remington Jewelry
(630) 860-3323

-----Original Message-----
From: OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of John
Burke
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Official OpenMPE Directors Response to the Article of March 22,
2004 in ComputerWorld

>
> Official OpenMPE Directors Response to the Article of March
> 22, 2004 in
> ComputerWorld
>
> OpenMPE, Inc. was formed as an organization of HPe3000 users,
> vendors and
> consultants shortly after Hewlett-Packard announced in
> November of 2001

<-- big snip-->

I've been at the West Coast Solutions Symposium and have not had a chance to
comment until now.

GREAT RESPONSE!!!

Very professional but also firm. Congratulations to Board.

Two things need clarification.

1. At the end of the "Response ...", it says, "We have been waiting for HP
to announce its roadmap plan since the end of January, and then February,
but so far nothing has been forthcoming." In Mike Paivenen's email of 3/26,
he says, "We did provide a communication timeline to the OpenMPE Board at
the end of January, as promised." In his email of 2/10, Mike also said,
"Last Friday, vCSY met with the OpenMPE Board of Directors to provide them
an update on a couple of the important items on the e3000 end-of-life
roadmap."

So Mike says HP provided what it promised, but the Board says it did not. Or
are we caught in a definition of "what is is"?

2. Earlier in the "Response ...", it says, "HP has told us they want to
share their roadmap and strategy with OpenMPE and has required the Board of
Directors of OpenMPE to agree to a confidentiality agreement to do this."

If this means the Board has already agreed to an NDA, this is a huge
mistake. Five ninths of the Board is being elected in the current election.
At the eleventh hour the Board agrees to an NDA that binds future Board
members? Not good. If elected to the Board, my first action will be a
resolution to rescind the NDA pending renegotiation. Two things are
required: a termination date and a quid-pro-quo. I would also point out that
the bylaws are not at all clear on when the terms of Board members expire so
it could be argued that any actions taken in March are illegal. It is best
to have the new Board deal with this issue as its first order of business.

John Burke
Burke Consulting
Tel: 916-987-0265
e-mail: [log in to unmask]