"Robert F. Meissner" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Jeff (and others) -  I believe this note express my sentiments-  Should we
>not FLOOD the EDITORS of Computerworld with "Letters to the Editor" like this
>one, and demand equal time to correct the "poorly researched" article.  I
>know that it probably won't help, but neither does cancelling your
>subscription (like I did when I was quoted out of context 5+ years ago.)
>
>
>
>In a message dated 96-05-03 17:04:40 EDT, you write:
>
><< Reply-to:    [log in to unmask] (Jeff Kell)
>To:     [log in to unmask] (Multiple recipients of list HP3000-L)
>>made the article.
>
>We don't need miracles and perhaps not even a drastic risk on 3000 R&D; but
>we certainly don't need a corporate message that the platform is dead.  The
>CW article would have been more positive closing on that note rather than
>sounding so negative.  Positive input like the Aberdeen report helps; the
>3000-to-9000 conversion kits and migration strategies don't.
>
>Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>
>
> >>
I'm not interested in any political thing with HP, but one question:  Was HP
responsible for this article or just Computerworld?  Wouldn't Computerworld
take
editorial comments like normal print?   Another question, what kind of clout
does
Computerworld have in the HP community?  I'd suggest if your particular company
is
having problems justifying the purchase or maintaining a hp3000, maybe a
meeting
with HP would help?  We have always had a very good relationship with HP, and
out of
the big three, they have been most supportive in our efforts.
But, after reading all the articles and postings I guess I now realize we are
very
lucky here at Merck.  What I'm missing (and I tend to miss a lot! :)) is why
should
a company like hp spend above and beyond on R&D on a platform to compete with
UNIX
platforms, when you have a UNIX platform in the hp9000?  Just food for thought,
and
I wish everyone much success in your HP3000 world troubles.
 
--
 
[log in to unmask]
"my comments are not to be used in any way without my permission,
 except for replies to this newsgroup/listserver."
 
 
 
 
       The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
       This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
       my employer, Merck & Co., Inc.  All responsibility for the statements
       made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
       sender.