<<snip>>
Lastly, if you can run your business on a 917LX, why would you even consider
upgrading to an N4000/e3000?
<<end snip>>
The only reason I would consider upgrading is that on my 917LX I cannot
go beyond MPEiX 6.5 whereas the "N" or "A" class boxes are up in the 7.x
version of MPEiX (as are other models of the HP3000).
Of course, however, I do not know what upgrading to 7.5 will give me that
I don't already have except peace of mind (knowing I have the latest &
greatest version of MPEiX, TurboIMAGE etc. etc.)
Another reason is that I find the HP3000 to be very stable. I acquired my
917LX almost 10 years ago and haven't had a bit of trouble with it (yet).
Other than self inflicted issues I encountered trying to clean out the box
and the disc drives (groan.)
Over the past few years I have added "stuff" to the original configuration
(larger capacity drives, more memory, "new"er LAN card, new internal
ribbon cable and so on).
Yes, I spent a *lot* of money on my little 917LX way back when and I think
it will be a l-o-n-g time before I buy another (more powerful) box...
So far I have been able to develop a lot of things on my 917LX without
any problems. No complaints so far from anyone....
Anyway, regardless of the cost of the boxes and all the software
problems/issues I have encountered along the way (and there are a lot of
them!) I still consider the HP3000 to be the best platform I have *ever*
worked on (so far).....
Brian.
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:00:50 -0400, Brett Forsyth <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Well Brian, as you can see, the hardware is the smallest part of the cost, and
>the OS is the brunt, so it is not the hardware vendors that are setting the
>market price, it's HP and Client Systems. Please shoot the right bad guy.
>
>20K for a 750x4, plus the cost of an RTU, is actually cheaper than what Client
>Systems is asking for the same config system. So with apples to apples, why
>does it matter whom you buy the system from? We can still supply the
>product - can HP? There were only so many of these e3000s built, systems
>are constantly falling off the radar, and yet a demand still exists.
>
>Also, when it comes time to resell your e3000 system, whom do you think is
>going to give you your best ROI, when Client Systems is offering between 1-
>3K on N class e3000s? Third party typically gives a much better return, since
>we have the channels to move products such as this.
>
>...and let me say this one more time:
>
>UNLICENSED SYSTEMS ARE NOT ILLEGAL TO USE JUST BECAUSE HP SAYS SO
>
>IBM tried this crap in the mid '80s and got smacked down by the US Supreme
>Court. HP just hasn't had to go there... yet (re: Sherman Antitrust Act).
>
>Lastly, if you can run your business on a 917LX, why would you even consider
>upgrading to an N4000/e3000? Why would you go from tail end to leading edge
>and all the while complain about the cost? I'll bet you probably paid more
than
>10K for your original 917LX.
>
>There are clients out there that would easily loose more than 10K per hour if
>their systems went down - and I have a few. For the clients that are still
>running large ventures on their 3000s, this is just the cost of doing
business -
>always has been, always will be.
>
>Once again - we don't set the market value - we compete with it. HP and
>Client Systems set the market value - we just happen to have all the
>hardware, and they have all the RTUs. Do you really think HP would have
>created the whole RTU system if there weren’t an e3000 hardware glut?
>
>So don't blame third party for the lost licenses and the increased costs.
>
>Blame SLT's shoddy business practices regarding non disclosure of SLT license
>information already kept on file, and HP's ever changing rules regarding these
>licensing issues. I think they have figured out that it's hard for us to
find the
>baselines when the "officials" keep them moving.
>
>Can you imagine what this market would be like if we weren't here to get HP
>and Client Systems to toe the line? Why do you think HP is talking about
>lowering the cost of RTUs? It sure isn't because of Client Systems - why
>would they - they have absolutely no motivation to lower e3000 pricing.
>
>So really - who is screwing whom?
>
>
>
>> Exactly -- that is why I have been wondering for the longest time now why
>> these third party vendors selling HP3000's are asking such ludicrous amounts
>> of money for them.
>>
>> Why would I give them 10K+ for a system when I especially don't even get
>> the license to go with it?
>>
>> I'll keep my little worthless 917LX for a while to come........
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
