Lars notes:

> One thing to keep in mind is that it somehow seems that
> "equivalent" applications in "Unix-land" have a tendency to
> be somewhat more hungry for resources. .....

From the public and private tales of woe we hear from time
to time, almost seems like there oughta be quotes around
that "somewhat".....    ;-)     I recall for example a case some
time ago where a 3000 user set out to make a like transition
(IMAGE on 3000 to Oracle on 9000 I'm pretty sure it was):

This customer asked a very experienced techie how much
additional system resources it would be prudent to add in
making this move.  The expert's advise:  Figure on adding
three times the memory and five times the disc.  Customer
went ahead anyway...  time passes...  Customer comes back
and is unhappy;  complaining about how even three times the
memory and five times the disc was not enough to get
equivalent performance....

> Lars (just notice the recent threads from Oracle victims
> -ahem- users)

Interesting how the truth has a tendency to "slip out" eventually,
isn't it....     ;-))      .....  if only Bill and Monica had remembered
that  (first copyright on that here by Wirt, I believe)....

Semi-SIDEBAR:  Trying to main some semblance of objectivity,
let me add that from all reports (no first hand experience (thank
goodness) ), HP-UX has gotten a lot more reliable over the last
several years.  Expect y'all have seen HP's adds, touting the
"five nines" (99.999 percent) uptime guarantee for the latest HP
9000's and HP-UX.  MPE and IMAGE can't be content just to
rest on their laurels and well-deserved past reputation.  It's the
comparison between the MPE / IMAGE combination and other
competing OS and DBMS from here forward that counts most
of all in the long run....

Ken Sletten