Duane Percox sighs:

>Today I was using a new nifty web based system provided
>by HP to fill out some marketing blurbs about our products.
>For each product I get to check a box that defines what
>databases and what HP servers the software runs on.

>For servers, the HP 3000 is listed first .... very good!

>For databases, the list is:

[....snip MOST of the databases in the world worth
mentioning (and some that might not be worth it)....]

>Thanks goodness there were a couple of boxes for 'other'
>so I could fill in: Image/SQL.

sigh**2....

Duane is right;  in the last year HP has done a long list of
things that collectively indicate that in large part the HP
corporate perspective of the HP 3000 has undergone a
significant shift in the positive direction:  The Computerworld
"spider ad", taking a 3000 to the Internet show, etc., etc.

But then every once in awhile some little totally inexcusable
thing like this pops up, that makes you wonder if the HP
marketing organization is the gang that just can't shoot
straight no matter how much they practice:   They list
ALLBASE, but NOT Image;  even though Image is in
production use on many times more machines than stand-
alone ALLBASE (even if you count ALLBASE on HP-UX).

Does the above oversight call into question all the other good
things HP has been doing for the 3000 in the last year ??  I
think not;  HOWEVER:  Things like this are so especially
glaring in view of the fact that it would be a *zero cost* option
to include Image in the list of databases.  Leaving Image off
the list makes it conspicuous by it's absence..  Actually,
they should include BOTH TurboIMAGE *and* Image/SQL...

Hope springs eternal, but yet another sigh..... Come on, HP....

Ken Sletten
SIGIMAGE Chair