We seem to be getting back into emotional reactions rather then business
reactions.  The same thing happened in the OpenMPE session.  There started
to be much debate about how wrong this requirement was but when the question
was posed to the group of "emulator interested" people only about five
percent had a business reaction of "We are NOT interested if the hardware
MUST be HP."  The question isn't "Philosophically do you like the
restriction?".  The question is would you rather that MPE dies if this is
the only option?  Remember, HP owns MPE and has spent a fair amount of money
on maintaining and enhancing it over the years and HP (the company has made
their decision).  The people within HP that want to help us (AND THEY DO
EXIST) must build a business case for allowing something like this to
happen.  If part of that business case is a requirement that it run on HP
hardware, and that requirement helps to allow it to happen, then I (and
roughly 95% of the people in the OpenMPE session) consider that a
"live-able" solution.

        That is not to say that those of you that would refuse to use an emulated
PA-RISC environment under these requirements are wrong, just a difference of
what we are willing to accept and it's important to understand, from a
business prospective, that difference.

Thanx,
        Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Patrick Santucci
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 5:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [OPENMPE] PA-RISC Emulator


Jon Backus reports:

> One requirement HP is placing on the licensing of MPE on an
> emulatored PA-RISC environment is that it must be on HP hardware.

First, Jon, thanks for the reports. Not being able to attend HPW, I really
appreciate the updates and the chance to get caught up with what's going on
in the OpenMPE world.

Now to the point of my email: This requirement is asinine, imho. Why limit
an emulator that way? To keep the emulator company from being more
successful than HP at selling a box that can run MPE? One wonders.

No. That "requirement" is absolutely, unequivocally, unacceptable!

As Roy Brown pointed out, what constitutes HP hardware?
 - The fact that HP sold you the box?
 - What about a robust Compaq server, would that count? (I know,
   you already said it would.)
 - What if you bought the Compaq server *before* the merger?
 - But if I have a Dell server, then it's, "Sorry old chap,
   you'll have to cough up the money for something with 'HP'
   written on it, even though it's pretty much the same inside
   the box."???
 - And what if the emulator is written in an easily portable
   language and I persuade the emulator company to let me run
   it on some flavor of 'nix, or one of the new Apple Xserve
   servers, or a SUN box, or an AS/400, or <insert your favorite
   alternate hardware here>, will HP sue??

A PA-RISC emulator that runs MPE on "HP hardware only"??? PUH-LEAZE!!
Doesn't that sound to anyone else too much like what we have *now* with MPE,
an OS that runs on HP hardware only? It's "not open enough" -- that's the
rap, right? Shouldn't we be trying to get *away* from that paradigm? Sheesh,
HP, why not go all the way and require that a PA-RISC emulator must only be
able to run on PA-RISC hardware? =:^O

I think that one important goal of an emulator -- a strategic goal, if you
will -- should be to make it possible to run MPE on *more* varieties of
hardware, *not* less! Why not give the emulator (and the company that writes
one) a *real* chance to catch on and be successful? Why this desperate need
on HP's part for this kind of control? Why not let the *company writing the
emulator* decide what hardware *they* will support it on? After all, they're
the ones doing the work!

I'm sorry, but this just sounds like HP wants to have their cake and eat it
too (and make us pay for it!). This requirement makes about as much sense as
the proposal to allow OpenMPE licenses to only be sold to those who already
own an MPE license! "Die, MPE, Die!" is what HP still seems to be saying...

My $0.02,
Patrick - writing with NON-HP hardware!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Patrick Santucci
HP e3000 Systems Administrator
Computer Operations Team Lead
Cornerstone Brands, Inc.
(std disclaimers apply, my opinions are my own, etc.)