Apparently most members of the OpenMPE list must have lives since this has
been dangling in the ether for almost 12 hours now with no comments.
Luckily for all of you, I have no life, so I will start the ball rolling
with my $0.02.
First, let me thank Mike Paivinen and all the members of vCSY who have
contributed to this document. I know it has been a difficult process, made
more so I suppose by those of us criticizing your every move or non-move.
All-in-all I think it is a good start on something we can live with (note,
please refer back to this sentence after reading my criticisms below). Mike
calls it a draft and my hope is that he means it in the sense that there is
negotiating room on some of the stickier points.
Second, I assume (hope) the Board of OpenMPE has had a chance to review and
comment on this proposal already, though I'm surprised it was not
accompanied by a statement from the Board.
That said, let's proceed.
Mike Paivinen said:
>
> At HPWorld last year, a number of questions were raised about
> HP's intentions
> for licensing and distributing MPE/iX. The major concern
> seemed to be that
> without some more details, companies interested in creating a
> PA-RISC platform
> emulator would be unable to fully evaluate their business
> case for moving
> forward with an emulator project. Below is HP's current proposal for
> distributing the MPE/iX operating system independent of the
> HP e3000 hardware
> platform. All of your questions and comments are much
> appreciated and will be
> considered in subsequent drafts.
>
> This proposal reflects the current intent of HP based on
> current knowledge
> and information. It is possible that HP will not be able to
> deliver on the
> points mentioned below. The descriptions and FAQ below are
> subject to change
> at any time.
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Mike Paivinen
> MPE/iX R&D Project Manager
>
> ..........................................................
Again, thank you Mike and all the members of vCSY who contributed.
>
> vCSY intends to establish a new distribution plan for the
> MPE/iX operating
> system (OS) which will likely be effective by early 2004.
I'd rather see them shoot for end of 2003, but can live with early 2004
provided vCSY has not adopted the Atmarian calendar. ;-)
> The MPE/iX OS
> would be licensed independent of the HP e3000 hardware
> platform. The license
> terms would grant the licensee the right to use a single copy
> of MPE/iX on a
> single HP hardware platform subject to certain terms and
> conditions. Such
> terms and conditions would require MPE/iX to be run in an
> emulated environment,
> hosted on an HP platform, and would include a statement that
> MPE is provided
> "AS-IS" with no warranty.
The stipulation that it can only be run in an emulated environment is
disappointing to me. I had held out hope that this inexpensive license could
be used as a means to motivate everyone, including homesteaders, to move to
a common release of MPE/iX. This is probably a pipe dream since many current
MPE administrators are loath to change their OS once they feel they have a
stable system. However, with this stipulation, we can not even dream.
My only comment I guess is this seems an unnecessary restriction that only
serves to complicate things and is probably the result of internal HP
politics and the meddling of corporate lawyers.
Perhaps HP would consider modifying this to read "in an emulated environment
until after end of support, when this restriction would be lifted."
>
> HP does not intend to provide an emulator nor endorse the use
> of an emulator.
> The HP recommended action for e3000 customers continues to be
> to transition
> from MPE/iX to another HP platform. At the same time HP
> realizes that some
> customers are interested in running MPE/iX applications in an emulated
> environment.
>
Standard legal mumbo jumbo.
> The expected price for an MPE/iX license is roughly $500 and
> reflects the cost
> to HP to sell MPE/iX. It is non-refundable and the right to
> use MPE/iX is
> non-transferable. The licensee will not be able sublicense
> their right to use
> MPE/iX, even on a temporary basis. HP intends the new MPE/iX
> software license
> to include certain MPE/iX, add-on subsystems. The full list of bundled
> subsystems has not yet been determined.
>
A lot said here. "roughly $500" seems quite reasonable and does not pose a
discouragement to hobbyists.
"The licensee will not be able sublicense their right to use MPE/iX, even on
a temporary basis." seems unnecessarily restrictive. I would like to hear
some explanation of why HP cares. As long as it is one valid license per
machine, what's the harm? This prohibits emulator companies or ISV's from
bundling a copy of MPE/iX with their products. More on this below.
"The full list of bundled subsystems has not yet been determined." Put a big
Bourbaki danger symbol here. What are the sticking points? It was my
understanding that most, if not all, the software HP licensed from third
parties was intimately tied into MPE itself and not the subsystems. Which
subsystems is HP thinking about not including? An MPE without compilers
would be next to useless for example.
> If the licensee, already running in an emulated environment,
> desires to update
> to a newer version of MPE/iX and/or its subsystems (even
> running on the same
> hardware) then the licensee must purchase a new version of
> MPE/iX, which will
> include a new license.
This implies HP will make multiple versions of MPE/iX available, which seems
to me to complicate the situation. Mike, could you comment on this?
> If the licensee, already running in an emulated
> environment, wishes to use MPE/iX on a platform different
> from the original,
> he/she may do so without involving HP. This requires: 1) the
> licensee to move
> MPE/iX and included subsystems from the original emulated
> platform to the new
> emulated platform, 2) the new target system is an HP
> platform, and 3) MPE/iX
> is being run in an emulated environment, meaning it is not
> running natively
> on the target platform.
Again, we have this "emulated environment" sticky point, but otherwise, this
seems reasonable.
>
> Customers wishing to test an emulator in their own work
> environment will need
> to buy a copy of MPE/iX to obtain the new MPE/iX license. If
> they decide not
> to purchase the emulator they still will have the right to
> use the MPE/iX
> license at a later time. Since the MPE/iX license is not
> transferable and
> cannot be sublicensed, an emulator vendor cannot preload
> MPE/iX on their
> product, nor can they purchase an MPE/iX license in the name
> of a customer.
Aargh! All I can say is why, why, why? This just complicates everyone's
life, including HP's. HP should concern itself ONLY with one valid (i.e.
paid for) license per machine. How it gets paid for, and by whom should not
matter.
> However, emulator vendors may buy their own MPE/iX license(s)
> and demonstrate
> the emulator using customer data.
>
Sheesh. See above.
>
> ..........................................................
>
> FAQ
> ---
>
>
> 1. What is the price for MPE/iX?
>
> A. HP intends to sell MPE/iX and certain HP MPE/iX add-on
> subsystems for approximately $500 USD.
>
The price is right, but the "certain HP MPE/iX add-on subsystems" needs to
be determined soon. My proposal: everything unless there is a good legal
reason for excluding it.
>
> 2. When can I buy MPE for this price?
>
> A. HP intends to offer MPE/iX and the extra add-on subsystems in
> the early 2004 timeframe.
>
Please shoot for end of 2003. Give yourself a challenge. I would think that
any company proposing to build an emulator will need MPE/iX no later than
the end of this year to start testing.
>
> 3. What if one or more emulators are completed prior to the early
> 2004 date, will HP consider moving this date up?
>
> A. This 2004 time period reflects HP's current intent. Please do
> not assume an earlier date.
>
I'm not assuming an earlier date. 2004 is probably OK for end user sales,
but anyone planning to build an emulator should be able to legally test it
prior to "early 2004".
>
> 4. Under what terms will MPE/iX be licensed?
>
> A. HP intends to create new license terms for MPE/iX that differ
> from the current license terms. The purchaser (licensee) will be
> granted the right to use MPE/iX and certain add-on subsystems, as
> long as MPE/iX is run in an emulated environment that is hosted
> on an HP platform. The licensee will not own MPE/iX or the HP
> add-on subsystems. HP intends to license MPE/iX "As-Is".
>
Again, we have the "certain add-on subsystems" and "emulated environment"
issues. I suspect HP is unlikely to budge on the "emulated environment"
issue, but I think they should explain why.
>
> 5. How can I buy MPE?
>
> A. This has not been decided at this time, but we hope to offer
> MPE/iX and certain subsystems via an HP Web site. The customer
> should be able to purchase MPE/iX online, download the OS, or
> have it shipped on CD.
>
Cool, though I would think this might involve a lot of work.
>
> 6. Which MPE/iX add-on subsystems are included?
>
> A. HP intends to bundle all of the HP proprietary MPE/iX add-on
> subsystems after the end-of-support date. Prior to this date,
> some add-on subsystems may be bundled into the Fundamental
> Operating System (FOS), and others may be available at an extra
> cost. HP has not yet determined which add-on subsystems will be
> included in FOS.
>
Place a big Bourbaki danger sign here. Huh? So if I buy a license in 2004, I
will either have to pay "at an extra cost" for some items not included, or
wait until 2007 and buy another license for $500? Again, you are
complicating everyone's life, including your own.
>
> 7. Are obsolete subsystems, such as BRW, included?
>
> A. BRW is not obsolete; however, at this time HP has not
> decided which, if any, obsolete add-on subsystems will be
> bundled with MPE/iX.
>
THIS IS A BIG DEAL!
>
> 8. Are expensive subsystems, such as 24x7 TurboStore included?
>
> A. This has not been decided at this time.
>
When will this be decided?
>
> 9. If a customer buys a used e3000 without any add-on subsystems,
> can they buy MPE to get some of the subsystems for $500?
>
> A. No, the new MPE license will not allow MPE to be used in a
> native (non-emulated) environment.
>
Disappointing. Where can they get the subsystems, since HP is out of the
business of selling subsystems on 10/31/2003?
>
> 10. Will the AIF Procedure Exits (AIF:PE) be included with
> MPE/iX?
>
> A. Yes.
>
How about the documentation? A quick search does not show it available at
docs.hp.com.
> 11. Who is the licensee – the individual that purchases MPE or
> the company/entity they work for?
>
> A. The company/entity who employs the individual will be the
> licensee, and will be the party that enters into the end user
> license terms with HP. In very limited cases an individual may
> be a licensee.
>
What about individual hobbyists? Again, why all the red tape. One valid
(paid for) license per machine should be the mantra.
>
> 12. What does the "AS-IS" clause mentioned in the new MPE
> license mean, and why has this been added to the new license?
>
> A. This clause means that HP will not provide a warranty or
> provide support for MPE/iX under the license agreement. The end
> user will be responsible for supporting MPE/iX and uses MPE/iX at
> his or her own risk.
>
OK.
>
> 13. Why does the new MPE license require me to run MPE on HP
> hardware?
>
> A. HP offers a wide range of Windows-, Linux-, and HP-UX-based
> systems that would make suitable host platforms for an emulated
> environment. Note: not all of these systems may be able to
> host an emulated environment depending on the choices made by
> the emulator vendors.
>
>
Real answer: Because this is the only way the concept could be sold to HP
management. While annoying, I can live with it.
> 14. Does the new MPE license allow me to run MPE on an e3000?
>
> A. No, the new license covers an emulated environment only.
>
See above my complaints.
> 15. Does the new MPE license allow me to run MPE on a 9000?
>
> A. HP intends the new license to allow a user to run MPE/iX on a
> 9000 but only in an emulated environment. If it became possible
> to run MPE/iX natively on PA-RISC 9000 series platforms, this new
> MPE/iX license would not grant the licensee the right to do so
> without changes to its terms and conditions.
>
Now this is very curious. What does "If it became possible to run MPE/iX
natively on PA-RISC 9000 series platforms" mean? Please explain.
>
> 16. What happens if no one creates a PA-RISC emulator?
>
> A. This new license would not be offered.
>
Makes sense given the restriction of "emulated environment". But, again, I'd
like to see this removed, because HP really has no vested interest in not
allowing this.
>
> 17. Will the emulator vendors be allowed to offer a longer
> demonstration period for potential customers to do thorough
> testing of the emulator running MPE?
>
> A. No, an emulator customer is expected to purchase MPE/iX at
> the full price. The customer needs to bear in mind that the
> purchase of MPE/iX will be non-refundable and the license is non-
> transferable. This is true even if the customer decides not to
> buy the emulator.
>
Bad, bad, bad! There is NO JUSTIFIABLE REASON for this restriction! It only
servers to complicate everyone's life.
>
> 18. Why do I have to pay for MPE before I've decided to buy an
> emulator, and why can't I get a refund if I decide not to
> purchase the emulator?
>
> A. HP plans to sell MPE/iX for significantly less than the
> previous price, which ranged from tens of thousands to several
> hundred thousand dollars. At the proposed price of $500, HP needs
> to keep the process as simple as possible, which means no license
> transfers, no refunds, and no special licenses for demo purposes.
> Please keep in mind that HP expects that an end user can keep the
> copy of MPE/iX and use it later in an emulated environment.
>
Pretty silly, but if the cost is only $500 and it includes EVERYTHING
NECESSARY, I can live with it.
>
> 19. Why can't the new MPE license be transferred to a new
> owner, as can be done today?
>
> A. HP's goal is to have the licensing of MPE/iX be simple and
> automated. The anticipated low price for MPE/iX reflects this
> goal.
>
Again, needless red tape and roadblocks that buy HP nothing.
>
> 20. If my company simply changes its name do we need to buy new
> copies of MPE?
>
> A. HP currently believes the answer is no, provided a company
> shows sufficient documentation indicating the name change.
>
See above. File this under ludicrous insinuation of corporate attorneys into
the process.
>
> 21. If my company, "A", has an agent relationship with company
> "B", can I purchase MPE in the name of company "B" so that it
> might be bundled with other services I provide?
>
> A. HP currently believes the answer is no, the end user/entity
> must directly agree with HP's terms and conditions stated in the
> MPE/iX license. HP plans to sell MPE/iX directly to the end
> customer, without the assistance of channel partners.
>
Ditto above.
>
> 22. If my company acquires another company that has hundreds of
> copies of MPE and the licenses to run MPE on emulators, am I
> required to get a new MPE license for all of these copies of MPE?
> Or, can I use MPE since I will have all of the assets and
> contracts of the purchased company?
>
> A. An end user will not be able to transfer the software even in
> an acquisition. You will be required to purchase new copies of
> MPE/iX with your company being the licensee. Today, in the same
> scenario described above, you are required to go through HP's
> standard software license transfer process. However, under the
> new MPE/iX license, it is expected that a licensee will be
> prohibited from transferring the license. Thus new copies must be
> purchased.
>
Ditto above. The world would be a much kinder, gentler place without
corporate attorneys.
>
> 23. I have an e3000 today complete with a valid MPE/iX license,
> and I want to run MPE on the emulator -- what are my choices?
>
> A. You may buy a new copy of MPE/iX to run on a PA-RISC emulator
> and keep your e3000 fully functional. There have also been
> discussions around a "load and go" approach for obtaining MPE/iX
> and the supplied MPE/iX subsystems. This idea could involve
> transferring MPE/iX to the host platform via disk imaging, or by
> physically moving the disk drives from the e3000 to the host
> platform. At this time, HP has not decided how we will handle the
> licensing implications in cases where MPE/iX is not purchased,
> but rather obtained from an existing e3000.
>
"PA-RISC emulator" should be changed to "emulator" since the emulator could
be written for an HP Intel platform. The rest is kind of interesting since
it seems to conflict with #24 below.
>
> 24. What happened to the idea of a transfer license for MPE
> from an e3000 to an emulated environment?
>
> A. At the proposed price of $500, HP needs to keep the process
> as simple as possible, which means no license transfers.
>
See #23.
>
> 25. If I buy a new HP platform on which to host the emulator,
> can I move MPE from my existing emulated environment to the new
> host?
>
> A. Once you have the new MPE/iX license, you may move MPE/iX from
> one emulated host platform to another, subject to the terms and
> conditions of the license, and without involving HP.
> Note: a "move" means the original copy of MPE/iX is fully deleted
> from the originating platform.
>
OK. Unlike some of the answers, this seems quite reasonable and eliminates
red tape.
>
> 26. Is the new MPE license tied to a particular release of MPE?
>
> A. No.
>
Not sure what this means, since you cannot upgrade without buying another
license. See #27 below. Also, this again seems to imply there will be
multiple releases of MPE/iX available for license - a questionable approach.
> 27. If I already have a copy of MPE/iX and this new license, is
> there a lower priced update to MPE/iX that I can purchase rather
> than paying for a full release?
>
> A. No, HP intends that there will be only one price for MPE/iX
> and the add-on, bundled subsystems. To obtain a newer version of
> MPE/iX you must buy it.
>
Annoying, but tolerable.
>
> 28. Does an MPE license require periodic renewal?
>
> A. No, HP plans to have the license terms grant the end user a
> perpetual license, subject to the end user's compliance with the
> terms of the license.
>
OK, makes sense.
>
> 29. Will the emulator companies be required to reduce the CPU
> clock speed (throttling) to conform to certain models of the
> e3000?
>
> A. No, the emulator vendors are free to emulate any model of an
> e3000, including a fully functional, unlimited-user, and
> unlimited-process system.
>
Kind of a silly question, but I suppose one that has to be asked and
answered anyway.
>
> 30. How is an ISV protected if HPSUSAN and HPCPUNAME can be set
> by emulator companies to any value?
>
> A. These details need to be worked out between the emulator
> vendors and the ISVs. At this time HP has no plans to require
> emulator companies to maintain certain values for HPSUSAN or
> HPCPUNAME.
>
Hooray for common sense. Let the market decide how to handle it.
>
> 31. Where can I find more information about this emulator concept,
> and who are the main companies looking at it right now?
>
> A. Please see the emulator pages which will be hosted on the
> openmpe.org web site.
When can we expect this?
==================================
Again, thanks to Mike and vCSY for moving forward on this. I hope I have
stimulated some discussion.
***********************************************************
* John Burke *
* Burke Consulting Email: [log in to unmask] *
* 7224 Pine Grove Way Phone: (916) 987-0265 *
* Folsom, CA 95630 Web: www.burke-consulting.com *
***********************************************************
|
