In article <[log in to unmask]>,
[log in to unmask] writes

(Some snippage>

>     Patrick wrote:
>
>>     Wot, no benchmarks?


>     To the best of my knowledge, it has been some time since CSY did any
>     TPC benchmarks.  First, it is very expensive(time and dollars) to do a
>     benchmark, especially one like TPC since there are many rules to
>     follow and it must be independently audited.  That expense must be
>     weighed against the benefit of doing the benchmark and, in my opinion,
>     there are not enough benefits to justify the cost.  Why do I say that?

>     I do not like to pigeonhole or stereotype people or companies but, in
>     the world of HP3000 sales, we are not usually dealing with people who
>     are comparing the performance of the HP3000 against another platform.
>     And isn't that the primary purpose of an "industry standard"
>     benchmark?  We are usually (1)dealing with customers who already have
>     an HP3000 and are looking to add or upgrade.  In that case, since they
>     are familiar with how their application runs on their HP3000, a
>     comparison of their HP3000 to other HP3000s provides them with a
>     better gauge than an "industry standard" benchmark which is running
>     code and doing things that they are probably not.


>  Or, (2) we are
>     dealing with a customer who does not have an HP3000, but is looking at
>     the HP3000 because that's where the application runs.  That is, the
>     application is driving the decision to purchase the HP3000.  When the
>     applications(those that are causing customers today to buy HP3000s)
>     become readily available on other platforms, then there may be a need
>     to have something like TPC benchmarks in order to compete.  In my
>     current experience, the applications that are bringing new customers
>     to the HP3000 only run on the HP3000.  If I am wrong on that, please
>     do not hesitate to let me know.

Excuse me while we boil over with rage and disappointment.

No, Jon, you are not wrong about the people who you currently find
considering new HP3000s. That is because HP, through neglect and
inattention over the years, has made it so.

But yes, you are wrong to promulgate this attitude now. If HP is serious
about bringing about the renaissance of the HP3000, this sort of mindset
*has* to stop. Period. Right this minute.

You just have to start believing you can sell HP3000s again into a
competitive market. Because if HP don't, customers sure won't.

You have to be looking at how you can bring people to the HP3000. Which
means they have to be able to compare an HP3000 solution against any
other on 'bang per buck'.

Don't forget that even those HP3000 upgraders, and HP3000 dedicated-app
considerers, have a choice. They could go to a different app on Unix, or
NT, and be lost to the HP3000 market.

Now maybe you are right about TPC not being the most relevant thing
here. That we can buy.

But what if you are right about the only people who will ever now buy an
HP3000? In that case, why bother with a renaissance? Unless CSY can lose
the defeatist attitude evinced above, it's going to be a self-fulfilling
prophecy anyway.

Shucks.

Roy Brown
Alan Yeo

--
Roy Brown               Phone : (01684) 291710     Fax : (01684) 291712
Affirm Ltd              Email : [log in to unmask]
The Great Barn, Mill St 'Have nothing on your systems that you do not
TEWKESBURY GL20 5SB (UK) know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.'