Excellent response! Many people are keeping there HP3000 and applications
for exactly this reason. Many customers, take a look at the tools that are
available for the application to make it successful. That is why when new
applications like say "data warehouse's or data mart's" are created, people
look for the best tools available on UNIX or NT. But, the HP3000 can be
viewed as a data warehouse too! There are several vendors that provide
solution's here on say a smaller HP3000. If they elect to purchase a UNIX or
NT solution, then they look at the best connectivity tools to augment their
HP3000 technology and coexist with other applications that are created on
the peripheral. Many HP3000 customers choose to coexist with the new
technology with software that provides connectivity. In turn the HP3000
provides some of the best application technology. Take a look at HP Open
Skies for example it runs circles around the Saber System from IBM, 10 times
more transactions can be processed. There are many stories around.
Hewlett-Packard themselves even run a majority of there applications on the
HP3000! Most of the mail-order, managed care, and distribution top sites run
on the HP3000!

Mark, our HP3000 community provides many testimonials at almost every vendor
site there are many stories from top name companies that have
mission-critical, e-commerce and everyday applications running on the
HP3000! The comparison below is a great testament to the HP3000. HP CSY
Marketing should make a HUGE deal in the tech rags about this! Many of us
still ask, why?

Good luck.

John Saylor
U.S. MPE Sales Manager
Quest Software, Inc.
"Ensuring Application and Information Availability"

Main        (949) 720-1434
Toll Free   (800) 306-9329 x8422
Direct      (949) 754-8422
Fax         (949) 754-8999
mailto:[log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Anderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999 6:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: HP 3000 Justification


Lets clarify something first. When you say HP3000, you mean HP hardware
running
MPE/iX. The same exact hardware running Unix is called an HPUX. So (HP
hardware
+ MPE = HP3000 ) and (HP hardware + Unix = HPUX ).

Now then, Not only does the MPE/iX OS run better, with less admin., and
less
technical knowledge required, than say Unix or NT. It's also a faster
OnLine
Transaction Processor, than Unix or NT. Much faster and rightfully so,
MPE comes
with a file system that knows all about record lengths, block length's,
fixed or
variable, binary or ascii. Also, native and exclusive to MPE is the
World class
DBMS, Turbo Image/SQL. By far the simplest, most reliable DBMS in the
World
today. Not only does Image perform better, requiring less hardware to do
the
same job as say ORACLE, or SYSBASE, but Image has very little admin. and
technical knowledge requirements. While your DB admin. makes a full time
job of
ORACLE administrative duties, the same DB ADMIN. person will be finished
with
Turbo Image admin. duties before morning break.

I heard about someone (I'll refer to as They) made some test comparisons
of
MPE/iX and HPUX, on the same exacted hardware. By first loading Unix,
and then
ORACLE for HPUX, and a test app. The test app was setup to do massive
batch
updates for a fixed duration of time. I don't recall the exact numbers,
but the
HPUX did approx. 300 to 400 TPS. Next they loaded MPE/iX (I think this
was in
the 5.0 days) on the same exact machine, and then ORACLE for MPE, and
the same
test app. They said the MPE box blow the 4 digit counter, counting TPS.
They had
satisfied their curiosity, and made no further tests. I would like to
know WHO
really did this test, if anyone, and what the exact numbers were. Not
only would
this add to Mark Ranft' ammunition, but mine and probably others as
well.  I
also wonder how much faster it would of been using Turbo Image instead
of
ORACLE, kind of a three tiered comparison. If "THEY" remain unknown, is
their
anyone on the list that can do this sort of test, and report back to the
list
all the numbers.

My current employer has just replaced one of our HP3000 with a Data
General Unix
machine, to do Online Transaction processing. I was consulted about it,
but
being the new guy on the job, my recommendations didn't go far enough.
The Unix
does OK, I mean Not bad, but we all know that Unix doesn't have a clue
what a
transactions is, or a record length. At least not at the OS level. OTOH,
Unix is
great (More so than MPE) with byte streams. Back in 97 I setup an HP3000
with
Samba, used it as a PC file sever, it worked OK, I mean NOT bad, but MPE
seemed
 to handles each record in the byte stream file with the same overhead
as it
would for any other transaction. The Unix OS does the byte stream file
server
job much faster than MPE. However, when your looking for OLTP, mission
critical,
and if downtime is absolutely not allowed, and if you want better, more
reliable
performance, and you want to spend less money then your competitors,
then
without a doubt, the HP3000 is what you need.

Mark Ranft wrote:

> Hi 3K Fans,
>
> I have a new project.  I am having a lot of fun doing this, and I decided
to
> let you join in on the fun.
>
> I have been asked to write a paper to help defend a client keeping their
HP
> 3000.  One of my client's clients is seeking an answer to that really
stupid
> question:  Why do you keep running on the HP 3000 platform?
>
> I am looking for:
>         Proof of HP's Continued commitment to MPE,
>         names of large companies that still use HP 3000's,
>         and any other ammunition we can find.
>
> As I said, I am already enjoying this project.  (can you imagine actually
> getting paid to defend something you love.)
>
> Mark Ranft
> CEO, Consultant
> Pro 3K
> www.Pro3K.com
> [log in to unmask]
> (612) 701-8182