If the only issue is whether or not software will run if the HPSUSAN or
HPCPUNAME changes, and HP refuses to release SSConfig, (as is their right),
then can't the software vendors who wish to continue to support the
MPE/OpenMPE community find another method to secure copies of their product?
Microsoft seems to manage to make a few gazillion dollars a year without the
equivalent of HPSUSAN or HPCPUNAME.

Does SSConfig provide other vital utilities in case of a change in CPU?  If
it does, can the OpenMPE group find a way to emulate/simulate SSConfig?
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan M. Backus <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: A No for SSConfig


>         From my prospective, the topic of SS_Config usage isn't so much
what we
> consider 'reasonable' to expect from application and utility software
> vendors.  It's more of an issue of implementing a safety net for the
> exceptions.  Even if there ends up being no exceptions, there was no harm
in
> having the assurance.  I think, while "virtual CSY" still exists there
> should be an effort to create a policy by which trusted entities can use
> SS_Config (and/or a tool similar to it) beyond 2006 under a 'reasonable'
and
> well defined set of circumstances.  We then tuck that away and maybe it
> never gets used.
>
> Thanx,
>         Jon
>