Thus it was written in the epistle of VANCE,JEFF (HP-Cupertino,ex1),
>
> I do understand your point and Nick's.  But I don't see where an N-
> class fails to meet our customers' needs over the next 5 years.  Is
> this entire discussion merited solely on the price of 9000 h/w vs.
> 3000 h/w?  I agree there will be more used PA-RISC 9000s than 3000s
> once IA-64 takes off.   I don't see this plan increasing the sustainable
> life of MPE, but I am sure there are others than can enlighten me.

I'll take a shot at that :-).  Think beyond the 5 years, Jeff--after all, I
think that that is the time frame we're discussing.  If in either 2003 or 2006
HP takes out the code in MPE which checks to make sure that it is running on
a 3000 instead of a 9000, those shops which intend to stay on the 3000 beyond
that point (and the shops which provide MPE support) will be able to stock up
on the much-more-plentiful 9000 hardware and make use of it running MPE.

That should extend the ability of those shops to keep MPE boxes running by many
years.

Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([log in to unmask]) | From the Tom Swifty collection:
Southern Adventist University    | "The door's ajar", said Tom openly.
Deep thought to be found at      |
http://www.southern.edu/~ashted  |

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