In a message dated 12/8/2001 8:09:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, [log in to unmask]
writes:


> They (CSY) ran
> the numbers and saw it was not in their best interest to
> port mpe to ia-64. Given their funding/staffing levels they
> saw it would take until after 2006 to finish the port.
>
> Get this: once existing ISV's saw this late delivery of the
> port they began in earnest to plan to migrate off the platform.
> Why? Because they knew they would be price disadvantaged against
> their competition from 2002 to whenever mpe/ia-64 would be available.
>

What I don't understand is this.  There was a talk that HP is going to port
MPE to IA64 since 1996.   I mean people rewrite operating systems from
scratch in less than 2-3 years, why would you think that it will take 6 years
(not counting the prior 5 years) for HP to convert MPE?
Lots of people converted their software from UNIX to MPE/iX just for that
reason, beleiving that HP will port MPE to IA64.
I, myself, made a decision to stay with MPE/iX and not to move my software
anywhere else back in 1998 when my HP Salesrep told me that MPE will
eventually be available on IA64 and that we will be able to run MS EXE files
within MPE...
In any case, back in 1995 HP made a decision to combine all the value added
resellers and have only 2-3 channels, that was mistake #1.  I beleive
discontinuing HP3000 will be mistake #2.

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