In a message dated 96-04-19 18:38:20 EDT, [log in to unmask] (Larry
Boyd) writes:
 
>> I've often wondered why HP has such a lock on peripheral devices for the
>HP3000
>> - the lack of competition only serves to keep the prices artificially
high,
>such
>> as $48,000 for an 8 GB disk array with proprietary interface,
non-redundant
>> power, cooling, etc.  The new HASS devices bring down the price per GB
>> significantly, but when you add the cost of Mirror/iX, PowerTrust UPS
>(required
>> if you want your data protected in the event of a power failure and
>subsequent
>> UPS drain - a non-PowerTrust UPS won't provide this), it's still nearly
>> unreasonable, IMHO.
>
>HP had EMC as a competitor years ago (remember the EAGLE and the FALCON?)  I
>think, at that time, most people wanted to pay more so that they would have
>an
>HP supported drive.  Today things may be different?
>
>
 
Part of the problem that exists today is that some of the more redundant
and cost-effective 3rd party disk technologies on the market are supported
on the HP9000 system but not on the HP3000.  As HP is now using
3rd party disk mechs (certified to HP's standards) for their drives, maybe
the HP3000 should become more open to some of the 3rd party disks
that are currently supported on the 9000s.
 
Just a thought
 
Steve Cole