Hi Chuck,

Don't get me wrong. I will *not* be happy to hear any
announcement on 11/14 as the rumors have suggested.

However, I think its unreasonable to expect a company
to continue to manufacture a product if they determine
it doesn't fit into their business strategy. American
history has shown us that *many* products come and
go. HP/CSY has been very generous by giving us 5 year
plans on an ongoing basis. Few other vendors even come
close to this.

If HP decides its time to 'shut down' this LOB then
as long as I get some advance notice (like 5 years)
I feel they are being honest with me. If they just
shut it down and stopped answering the phones then
that would upset me.

How you interpret this is your choice, but for me, I
am more interested in moving forward and less interested
in wallowing in the past, or the 'what could have beens'.

Duane Percox    wk: 650.372.0200x608  fax: 650.372.3386
[log in to unmask]
www.qss.com
qwebs.qss.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Ryan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 1:38 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] Nasty rumor -> Email Carly at.........
>
>
> > I would like to take exception to this line of reasoning. Not
> > only with this post, but with previous postings made by John.
> >
> > HP owes you, me, and the general computing public *nothing*,
> > other than a good faith effort to provide support for products
> > they have manufactured. If they decide at a particular point
> > in time to announce the end of support for a particular product
> > then that is their choice. As long as they have a plan for
> > support that is sufficient for me to respond appropriately then
> > fine. From my experience, HP has always given products a minimum
> > support life of 5 years. This is a lifetime in our industry.
> >
>
> SNIP
>
> > And in the future, if HP products are the best choice I
> will continue
> > to buy and use them. IMHO, to suggest otherwise is to violate
> > the basic ethics that Information Technology professionals
> > should uphold.
> >
> > Duane Percox
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
>
> While I have stayed out of this argument to this point,
> mainly because I
> think it is futile, I have one major problem with your statement.
>
> HP has repeatedly and quite recently stated that the 3000 and
> MPE was an
> active part of its product line. This suggests to me that one
> of 3 things
> happened:
>
> 1) HP lied.
>
> 2) HP made a sudden decision to reverse itself.
>
> 3) See option 1.
>
> Neither of the above gives me any reason to consider HP as a future
> supplier. Nor would I have much faith in a person/company
> that believes this
> is an example of ethical business practices.
>
> Although, the amount of suprise in some of the posts has
> amazed me. Carly
> has consistantly shown herself willing to do anything that
> will raise short
> term stockholder value without concern for the company's reputation or
> longevity.
>
> Comments are mine... not my employer's..etc
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *