At 19:54 Tom Emerson asked a couple question on the
Current "short" OpenMPE survey we just put up at
http://www.openmpe.org/OpenMPEShortSurvey.htm :

I don't claim to necessarily know all facets of the
"right answer", but as just one member of the OpenMPE,
Inc. BOD I'll give it a shot:

> 1) [basically] "how many of which type do you have?"
> The first thing that comes into my mind is HP should
> already have an idea of this in the first place --

Maybe they *should* know;  and maybe they have a guess;
but the strong likelihood is that HP presently only
"knows" about MPE boxes that are still on HP support.
Because of that I suspect that HP fairly significantly
undercounts the actual MPE user base, since HP-supported
systems are only a percentage of the total (I don't know
what it is, but I do know it's not nearly all;  not even
close).  Various "total sales" numbers for the HP e3000
since day one have been bandied about;  somewhere in the
neighborhood of 60,000 - 70,000 total sold may be in the
ballpark;  with maybe around half or so of those still
running somewhere around the world (that's a harder guess).

> 2) who does the support work?
> Again, I find I tend to consider this either irrelevant or
> possibly damaging to "our case" -- HP has already decided
> they will stop support at some point in the future, so no
> amount of answers that say "HP" is their primary support
> channel would do any good.  saying that a "third party"
> does hardware or software support is what HP already
> expects, so this answer isn't likely to "change" their
> viewpoint or add any additional data to consider ...

I'll admit this one can perhaps be viewed as somewhat of
a two-edged sword depending on your primary perspective.
On balance it was thought this it was worthwhile
demograhics info;  some may disagree.

> so that leaves the third question "when do you need
> 'information' from us to help  homesteading / migration /
> whatever?" and again, I REALLY have to ask "what possible
> answer would sway any [HP] decision maker?"

Actually, if we get a large number of "we need this info
NOW" responses, I think that is perhaps the last best
chance of getting HP to make some public commitments prior
to HPW.

> The tone of this list actually points to an answer that
> wasn't included in the list: "we're pissed that we don't
> ALREADY have that information!".

I agree...  In retrospect I kind of wish we had included
last above as a choice...  Even so, I think the range of
allowable responses is valid;  and it's worth getting the
bean count:  It's hard to make a substantive case to HP
(even if we shouldn't have to make one) on just the weight
of various unconnected and all-over-the-map email messages
on 3000-L.  At least this will give us a count of some
kind.  Whether or not that will prompt HP to make some
commitments on the "required actions" list prior to HPW-LA
is something we should all know "soon".

> ... even though the survey might show 50% or more for the
> first answer [now], HP may not be capable of dredging up
> that information anytime soon [what with a merger to
> complete and all... :) ]

Oh, I'm quite sure HP is capable of making some reasonable
commitments on one or more of the "gang of six" required
actions listed in survey in short order if they want to.
Remember:  They don't have to complete implementation of
most of those gang-of-six items for several years;  they
just have to give the user base a reasonably good warm
fuzzy that they WILL do so down the road.

> ... what 'problem' are these questions addressing?

Non-action by HP so far;  on the survey "gang of six"
action list..  At least I hope that's what these questions
will end up changing...  stand by...

Ken Sletten
Member, OpenMPE Inc. BOD

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