This post (and others) led me to feel perhaps I should take a giant step
backward (or upward?) and say a few things in "the big picture".
 
* 3000 customers are overall the most satisfied with their machines, by
  the Datapro survey last year (?)
 
* 3000 users are a closely-knit, content and almost spoiled group with
  respect to problems.  They rarely occur.
 
* 3000 users do not care to migrate to Unix; those that do are not doing
  so voluntarily, but following their third-party apps or management mandate.
 
* 3000 users are content with their platform (despite our wishes for some
  additional tools to compete with Unix in networking and applications) and
  will likely ride out the platform to the bitter end if the choice arises.
 
I fear that the Proposition 3000/Computerworld Article/recent discussion has
put the *machine* in a negative light.  That is the farthest from the truth
of the intent (at least at my personal level of opinion).  Ironically, the
enemy seems to be HP's corporate policy and directions with regard to the
machine (not CSY, not Harry Stirling, but on a global scale).
 
Wirt's posting on Basic/V was rather moving.  HP's BASIC goes back over 20
years but the language hasn't been touched in the last decade (for the most
part).  Business Basic didn't fly that well (one compatibility issue) and
fell in the bit bucket.  Point remains, HP did what HP does best on Basic/V.
 
The 3000, overall, is what HP does best.  The 9000 is, like other Unix clones,
not only a hodgepodge conglomerate of dissimilar modules put together just
well enough to gain a piece of the large market share.  Same with the Intel
servers (mostly a hardware revenue without even their own OS), neither of
which they have any extensive experiene dealing with.  But with their Unix
market dominance, they can't flinch in pushing the 9000 line.
 
All we want, if we can only have one wish, is to embrace the 3000 as a viable
platform.  Without that, the rest is for naught, or as Alfredo put it, we are
just "rearranging furniture on the Titanic".  Until there is some influx of
R&D into CSY, there will be no one to carry the ball.
 
Another troublesome trend is the recent absence of list input from CSY.  Most
of our old friends are gone from CSY.  I know many have gone elsewhere, but
as for the rest, I hope they're just busy on the 5.5 roll-out.  Their prior
participation was the pinnacle of the 3000-L list's success, but their voices
are becoming silent (excluding Larry Boyd, Larry Byler, James Hofmeister, and
a few others). I, for one, appreciate any posts coming from hp.com; their
absence has me concerned.
 
Enough rambling.  At HPWorld we need to make a loud but constructive noise.
 
Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]>