Christian Lheureux wrote:
>As far as the emulator is concerned, we are talking of really 2 different
>pieces of software : one is the PA-RISC emulator running on top of another
>OS (possibly Linux), and the second one is MPE/iX itself, running on top of
>the emulator. The floated $500 figure refers to the RTU for MPE/iX only. I
>have no clue what a RTU for the PA-RISC emulator would be.

What is an RTU?

Thank you for making the distinction between the two modes of emulation.
(I suggest a note about this belongs in the FAQ)
Type 1: Hardware emulation.   In this case emulating the RA-RISC / HP-3000
computer hardware.   In addition one needs to have a copy of MPE/iX and the
rights to run it.   The plan is for HP to offer a copy of MPE/iX along with
a licence to make it all legal.  Also, to make emulation and licencing
easier, HP will remove the requirement to register the OS against the HP
SUSAN number.

Type 2:  Complete (platform) emulation.   Emulate everything: MPE/iX running
a PA-RISC, HP-3000 box.


Cortlandt Wilson
(650) 966-8555

>-----Original Message-----
>From: OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
>Christian Lheureux
>Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 6:44 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: MPE/iX Licensing and Distribution for an Emulated
>Environment
>
>
>John, due to time zones differences, I have the privilege of being
>the first
>available board member to be in the capacity to reply to your message.
>
>While I do not wish to elaborate on the feeling of frustration exposed by
>many a user/customer of HP since 11/14/01, I wish to commend the few
>remaining vCSY staff members for their action. Without these
>people, nothing
>would have been possible, and MPE would already be promised to the
>dust heap
>of IT history. I won't name them all, but everyone knows whom I'm talking
>about. Now we have a way to continue to work with customers who will not
>have migrated (for any reason) after MPE's official EOL in
>12/2006, and that
>means these sites have a future. Such was not the case immediately after
>11/14. It's a small step for us, but a giant leap for the OpenMPE
>Community.
>
>That being said, the "restrictions" laid out so far are quite fewand, IMHO,
>they all make sense :
>
>1) An activation process : This is no different of most currently available
>software. In fact, MPE is already restricted, by means of the famous
>HPSUSAN. You may even view the requirement as a way to protect
>your right to
>use MPE, by authenticating the licence.
>
>2) Run MPE on an HP platform : In fact, we view this "requirement" as
>relaxing the present restriction imposed on MPE. At this point
>(02/28/2003),
>MPE can only be run on an HPe3000 platform. In the emulated
>version, it will
>be allowed to run on ANY HP platform, not just a 3000.
>
>As far as the emulator is concerned, we are talking of really 2 different
>pieces of software : one is the PA-RISC emulator running on top of another
>OS (possibly Linux), and the second one is MPE/iX itself, running on top of
>the emulator. The floated $500 figure refers to the RTU for MPE/iX only. I
>have no clue what a RTU for the PA-RISC emulator would be. This latter
>amount would of course go to the emulator company. The question could be
>validly answered by the emulator companies.
>
>My €0.02
>
>Christian Lheureux
>Responsable du Département Systèmes et Réseaux / Head of Systems and
>Networks Department
>APPIC R.H.
>business partner hp invent
>Tel : +33-1-69-80-97-22   /   Fax : +33-1-69-80-97-14 / e-mail :
>[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>AIM nickname : MPE Evangelist
>"Le Groupe APPIC recrute, contactez nous !"
>
>
>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : OpenMPE Support Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]]De la part de
>> John Dunlop
>> Envoyé : vendredi 28 février 2003 15:22
>> À : [log in to unmask]
>> Objet : Re: MPE/iX Licensing and Distribution for an Emulated
>> Environment
>>
>>
>> Jeff, Mark et al who are continuing the sterling work for the HP3000
>> community that they have always done: Guys, please be aware
>> that there are a
>> lot of bitter feelings out there among the HP3000 faithful. I
>> am sure that
>> is not news to you but it is probably difficult for the
>> majority of HP3000
>> users to separate the recent(ish) management decisions at HP from the
>> sincere enthusiasm for the future of MPE shown by the few CSY
>> and support
>> people that remain. Before the announcement, HP3000 customers
>> were extremely
>> loyal to HP, since the announcement, HP3000 customers are
>> loyal to MPE and
>> are very lacking in trust for HP. Part of the problem that I
>> perceive is
>> that HP is still determined to extract $$$s from the
>> community that it has
>> turned its back on (notice I said HP, I don't really include
>> CSY under the
>> HP umbrella any more). It is my opinion (based on some information I
>> received) that HP will never relinquish its ownership of MPE
>> and may well
>> even offer some support after the published EOL of 2006.
>> Therefore, it would
>> appear that efforts to gain ownership of MPE are a waste of time and
>> resources. I have been reading the Emulator thread with
>> interest as it seems
>> a promising direction , but it seems that HP is also throwing
>> up obstacles
>> to this enterprise. I suppose it would be too much to hope
>> that HP would
>> give its blessing to an Emulator without imposing
>> restrictions, e.g. that it
>> must be run on an HP machine, each copy to cost $500, an XP
>> type activation
>> process etc. I am not against paying for an Emulator but I
>> think the cash
>> should go to the company who produces and maintains the
>> software, not to HP.
>> Just my .02 Euros.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John Dunlop
>>