Respectfully Mark,

MPE = reliability

Show me a system that hasn't been re-booted in the last two years, and I'll
bet it says HP3000 on it.  I had to reboot my Windows 98SE system at home
twice last night.  My Windows 2000 "professional" (yeah, right) system at
work required a reboot yesterday, even before it was finished with the
initial boot.  Windows still isn't ready for handling a serious business'
applications.  Business critical applications don't have a better platform.

MPE = selection of software

MPE shops exist in very large numbers, Mark.  They're not just for POSIX.
(Though it's nice to have the option to use APACHE, etc., however, alongside
your bullet-proof IMAGE applications).  There are world-class organizations
running software written 20 years ago on these systems, which have been
modernized for the times.  The operating system supports every major
language available, and is easily ported to (or from - if you don't use the
proprietary stuff like SPL, Transact & BRW).

MPE minus HP = cost effectiveness

HP has overpriced the MPE systems... but they are still selling.  Why?
Because they are still a very good solution for the money.  HP has crippled
the MPE systems by impeding the speed of the processors, but MPE with IMAGE
can still beat HP-UX with Oracle.  My point about it flourishing without
HP's control is not "water under the bridge".  I am talking about the future
as well as the past.  Businesses are still buying N4000 and A-series
systems.  Why?  Because they can be converted to UNIX later?  I don't think
so.  If HP would commit to opening MPE, they'd sell even more, (here, in
fact), because people would see a future in MPE.  They are shooting
themselves in the foot.  MPE would grow if truly open, without HP's "help".


Michael Snead


                -----Original Message-----
                From:   Mark Klein [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
                Sent:   Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:01 PM
                To:     [log in to unmask]
                Subject:        Re: PA-RISC Emulator

                On 1 Oct 2002 at 13:35, [log in to unmask] wrote:

                > In complete disagreement with Mark's assessment, I would
back all of
                > the POSIX stuff out of MPE. POSIX really is not much more
than a poor
                > imitation of UNIX. Given that Linux is freely available,
it doesn't
                > even belong on MPE. It is nothing other than an
unnecessary and
                > generally unuseful complexification of MPE.

                More water under the bridge. Without it, MPE would've died
in the mid
                90's. As far as pulling it out - it is too tightly
integrated with
                the kernel today as to make that darn near impossible.

                > But that market exists only if MPE is simplified and
                > made even more understandable to the average human than it
is now.

                Well, I suppose there's still MPE/V.

                > Indeed, I
                > suspect that it would become the dominant operating system
for every
                > small and medium commercial use other than web servers and
embedded
                > systems.

                How would you propose going head to head with Windows,
because that's
                the market you're describing?
                --
                Mark Klein
                http://www.dis.com
                PGP Key Available