www.baan.com <http://www.baan.com> . I usually guess at web site names
and 70% it is correct , but occasionally it brings
me somewhere I really don't want to be. Baan is a Dutch company that is
having some financial problems.
Dave Frenkel
Edifecs Commerce
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Norris [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 2:27 PM
To: David Frenkel
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FW: Off Topic: F-22 References
I have heard a lot about BAAN, but I know nothing about it.
Can anyone
direct me to a site?
Thanks.
#Joseph Norris (Perl - what else is
there?/HP3000/Linux/CGI/Msql)
print @c=map chr
$_+100,(6,17,15,16,-68,-3,10,11,16,4,1,14,-68,12,1,14,8,
-68,4,-3,-1,7,1,14,-68,-26,11,15,1,12,4,-68,-22,11,14,14,5,15,-90);
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, David Frenkel wrote:
Boeing is like most large companies that have numerous (and
growing)
divisions. The commercial airlines
group is implementing BAAN on a Unix (I believe) platform.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Norris
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 12:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: FW: Off Topic: F-22
References
Hello,
What box is Boeing moving to?
Thanks.
#Joseph Norris (Perl - what else is
there?/HP3000/Linux/CGI/Msql)
print @c=map chr
$_+100,(6,17,15,16,-68,-3,10,11,16,4,1,14,-68,12,1,14,8,
-68,4,-3,-1,7,1,14,-68,-26,11,15,1,12,4,-68,-22,11,14,14,5,15,-90);
On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, David Frenkel wrote:
Boeing is or has migrated off most of its
HP3000's, at one
point
Martin-Marietta was a big HP3000 user
in Denver. The original Hughes Aviation
(Satellites, etc)
and TRW
(satellites) were big HP3000 users.
Dave Frenkel
Edifecs Commerce
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Joseph
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
<mailto:[mailto:[log in to unmask]]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 12:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Off Topic: F-22 References
Hmm, noticed two references to the F-22
Raptor yesterday.
The first equated
the aircraft with the state-of-the-art in
military aviation.
The second
pointed out its delays and cost overruns and
was most likely
based on the
frequent question as to its necessity in a
post Cold War
world.
Like most major military hardware programs
around the world,
the reality is
probably both characterizations are correct.
A glass whose
content is equal
to half its volume is half full AND half
empty.
As the F-22 program has progressed, more
technical details
have started to
show up in the mainstream media. As a
non-engineer, just a
taxpayer
interested in military preparedness, I must
say I am
impressed with the
plane's capabilities and convinced of its
necessity. Most
of the fighters
in the USAF inventory are already over 20
years old and a
top notch
replacement will be necessary in the next
millenium.
Furthermore, the flight restrictions during
the recent
Kosovo campaign
clearly illustrate the need for more capable
military
aircraft even without
a superpower as potential adversary. The
current generation
of missiles and
aircraft are extremely lethal and easily
acquired by
virtually any entity
with the cash and connections. Credit
advances in computing
and CAD for
this situation; we need to leverage our
national advantage
in high
technology just to maintain a slight edge.
I recall the criticisms of the M1 Abrams
battle tank, Apache
helicopter, and
Bradley Fighting Vehicle in the 1980's. All
experienced
delays and cost
overruns, yet proved their overwhelming
capabilities during
the Gulf War.
I know that Boeing relies on HP3000 systems;
does anyone
know if
Lockheed-Martin has any? Perhaps if the
F-22 program had
some portion of it
reliant on our favorite platform we all
could be more
comfortable with its
continuation and ultimate success.
"Feeling a little like Wirt after this
off-topic discourse",
Robert Joseph
The NPD Group
[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
|
