Hi Folks,
Just to add a little perspective....found in Nov. 19, 2001 edition of
InformationWeek under the aptly titled column "inshort" on page 71(could not
find the on-line portion) the following words:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
HP's E3000 Endangered
Hewlett-Packard last week told customers of its HP e3000 servers that they
should start transitioning to other systems. Within five years, HP will no
longer support the e3000, which is used by about 70,000 customers. HP will
offer a mix of options to replace the e3000: Customers of the newest e3000
servers can start running HP-UX on them at no cost; customers of older
versions will get discounts on the vendor's HP-UX, Linux, or Windows
servers, along with services to help with the transition. HP says it's
abandoning the e3000, a proprietary system, because it wants customers to
move to open, standards-based commodity computing platforms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
Makes me want to run down to K-Mart on my lunch hour and buy the latest HP
toaster that tells me my car needs an oil change(its been in the shop for
two days for something else), that I should not send my kids to their
championship soccer game as it might rain, and that the pound picked up the
dog and the microchip in her collar indicates I have five days(or is that
years?) to pick her up before she is euthanized.....
I have better things to do.....
Eric Sand
[log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan M. Backus [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:44 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: [OpenMPE] Survey Question
>
> Jim,
>
> HP would still get their hardware support dollars. As far as the
> revenue
> for (MPE) OS software support, HP won't be seeing that anyway after
> 12/31/2006 and in a decreasing fashion between here and there. So, its
> not
> another block on the org chart losing money because of this.
>
> I don't believe that HP looked at it this way so they probably
> didn't think
> through it and then discarded the idea. I believe that HP looked at the
> revenue margins and made a business decision that they could make better
> margins by ending MPE and focusing their resources on other higher margin
> opportunities and/or by phasing out higher cost resources that are
> dedicated
> to MPE support, maintenance, and/or enhancements.
>
> Thanx,
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Phillips [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 12:46 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [OpenMPE] Survey Question
>
> Sounds like a win-win for HP: They sell more HP9000 boxes and don't spend
> any money supporting it. But wait, HP won't see any revenue for OS
> software
> support, will they? And the support money does not go to CSY, does it?
> So
> some other block on the org chart loses money.
>
> I am wondering, if it was this simple, HP must have already thought of
> this
> and discarded the idea. However, this (increased HP9000 sales) would be
> more of a selling point to get HP to release MPE to the OpenMPE consortium
> (or whatever you call it). I just have a feeling that HP has killed MPE
> and
> wants to see it stay dead, especially if it means MPE on something other
> than HP hardware.
>
>
> Jim Phillips Information Systems Manager
> Email: [log in to unmask] Therm-O-Link, Inc.
> Phone: 330-527-2124 P. O. Box 285
> Fax: 330-527-2123 10513 Freedom Street
> Web: http://www.tolwire.com Garrettsville, OH 44231
>
>
>
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
