Exactly!
I'm a VMS user/system manager, since 1983. When Compaq took over Digital
we were pretty much worried about the fate of VMS. Digital was not exactly
supporting
its prime source of income pretty well, in terms of PR.
Compaq kept the product alive, but sank its current platform (Alpha).
And of course we're speculating about its fate. Now I have no idea about the
market share
nor turn over of MPE and the HP3000.

It could be that each company had to offer something. Alpha vs. HP3000?

Hans Vlems

Jerry Leslie <[log in to unmask]> wrote in message
news:9sudlc$16s$3@joe.rice.edu...
> John Dunlop ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
> : A thought has just occurred to me..with the demise of the HP e3000, I
> : expect the VMS folks are dreading that the Compaq acquisition goes
> : through and VMS goes the same way as MPE.
> : That is unless they figured that Compaq was going to drop it anyway!
> :
> Exactly !!
>
> Go lurk in the comp.os.vms newsgroup for a while. There's also some
> discussion about Tru64 becoming the basis for the Unix of the merged
> HP, because of its more modern architecture.
>
> --Jerry Leslie     (my opinions are strictly my own)
>
>         "OpenVMS is today what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be!"
>            posted on www.openvms.digital.com on or about Sep 22,1998
>                            Quashed on Sep 23,1998
>            but saved on ftp://atlas.csd.net/pub/vms100.jpg
>

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