Based on my experiences over the years dealing with HP, I agree with 
Tracy's approaches here.

John Lee


At 01:08 PM 2/26/08 -0500, Johnson, Tracy wrote:
>As a candidate, I was looking for a good template to reply to.  I "like" 
>using those greater than signs in plain text for my e-mail responses.
>
>Thanks Joe!
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion
> >
> > Posted February 21st
> >
> > ==================================
>
>Happy-fun-ball preliminary statement snipped.
>
> > 1. HP has expanded its "permissible upgrade" language in its
> > RTU licenses. Does the vendor need to offer anything to the
> > community to prohibit the movement of MPE/iX from system to
> > system?  Something perhaps like unlocking the horsepower of
> > the 3000s in the A and N Class?
>
>My first response is "Whaaa?"  "Offering" a "prohibition" seems like a 
>contradiction in terms.  It is like driving to a toll booth, and paying 
>the attendant to keep you off the bridge.  If you know you can't get on, 
>why drive there?
>
>Unlocking the HP3000 systems is another subject entirely.  Once you 
>acquire a vehicle you should be able to make mods to the hardware, same 
>goes for computers.  Using the same metaphor, some mods may be only 
>allowed in racing venues and may not be street legal.
>
> > 2. How soon must HP make a decision about its source code
> > licensing for the 3000's operating environment? Is it
> > acceptable for the vendor to wait until the start of 2010, as
> > it plans to do now?
>
>As a organization with nine people on its board with with little or no 
>funds, I don't believe it is in our power to tell HP a that they "must" 
>make a decision and have them listen to us.  It is apparent HP cares not 
>one wit whether OpenMPE declares any decision "acceptable" or not, and 
>making such declarations isn't going to gain any friends at HP.  We're 
>more like a Public TV station that needs a telethon every once in a while 
>to keep us going.  But there's only one donor with the currency (MPE) to 
>make it worthwhile, and that is HP.  If we want HP to make that donation, 
>we need to convince HP (our viewership) the donation is worth their 
>while.  Otherwise MPE stays permanently on Pay Per View.
>
> > 3. What is the achievement for OpenMPE which the group must
> > accomplish during 2008 - the mission which the group must not fail at?
>
>Given the current status of OpenMPE and HP relations, I believe the one 
>accomplishment that OpenMPE needs to put under its belt, is to get HP to 
>work with us, and not be at odds with each other.  Everything else hinges 
>on this.  Although it is a cliché to say "Failure is not an option.", a 
>failure in 2008 is not a death knell, to parapharse Scarlet O'Hara, "2009 
>*is* another year!"
>
> > 4. Should third party support providers have access to HP's
> > diagnostics, especially stable storage tools, in case of a
> > system board failure, or the closing of a software company
> > which cannot update licenses (with HPSUSAN numbers) any longer?
>
>HP would have to change its modus operandi to lease those tools.  Since 
>such decisions aren't usually made on a whim, I think the onus would be on 
>the 3rd parties to negotiate such any contract.  In the worst case of a 
>post-mortem software company, copies of such tools should be put in an 
>escrow vault that can be purchased by one or more bidders.  OpenMPE should 
>encourage such a such decision without being demanding.   (Answer to 
>question #3 is germane.)
>
> > 5. Should OpenMPE go after the mission of testing the dozens
> > of beta test patches still stuck inside HP's 3000 labs? What
> > can the group do to convince HP that the expertise is in
> > place to do that testing, and release the HP improvements and
> > engineering to the full 3000 community?
>
>That would be a perfectly *fine* goal.  (Answer to question #3 is germane.)
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.1/1299 - Release Date: 2/26/08 
>9:08 AM

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