> I interpreted what the VP at Tufts said differently than you, I think.
> I interpreted his statement to mean that if MPE/iX were available as
> open source, then Tufts itself did not have the means, interest, or
> technical background to make the modifications that they might need
> in the future as their business evolves.  I don't see where he's
> saying that the community itself isn't capable of achieving this.
> I do think he's saying that his business plans cannot wait for that to
> happen.
>
> Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comments above.
>
> MikeP

I have to pretty much agree with Mike, we are now decided at migrating away
from the 3000.

I know this may not be what people want to hear but I think we've missed the
boat on this one, most big companies like mine with critical systems cannot
sit on the fence and wait to see if MPE will survive, we need to make plans
now, and unfortunately they cannot include an 'officially unsupported
product'.

That's not to say that I don't admire Jon and the boys for trying, I love
the 3000 for ease of use and development and stability, you all know the
script.  It's just that HP have dragged their heals long enough for most
people to move on now, it's just the homesteaders who need it now.

I talked to my board about the emulator idea and it got thrown almost
immediately, I couldn't even get it through on the basis of using it for
archive access, they'd rather just pay that little extra to convert the data
we need and need to keep, on mass.

I still can't believe that HP can afford throw away £50k/pa in support?

Sorry in more ways than one.

Regards

Peter Martin
IT Operations Manager
Initial Electronic Security
t. 01282 473561
f. 01254 267549
e. [log in to unmask]