> Mark writes: > > have been doing the same thing amongst yourselves? Maybe it is time to > > explore this with some sort of "3000 Consortium" or some such. > > > > Am I opening a can of worms? > > Yes, but one that is worth opening ... it's hard to go fishing without > worms. :) > > I brought up the same subject a year or so ago, but found little interest. > Maybe things have changed? > > Of course, I remember asking HP in 1984/1985 if I could buy the rights > to IMAGE...no luck. > > -- > Stan Sieler My experience with HP leads me to the conclusion that HP would much rather kill the HP3000 than sell it. I do not believe that HP cares to compete against their own product. Particularily if it were in the hands of people who really believed in it and pushed its business friendly features (hands off maintenance, rock solid reliablity, built in DBMS, superior multi-tasking features, low cost of ownership, hardware longevity, reduced need for OS mandated hardware upgrades, etc. ad nausium). If you get to talk to the CFO of an organization in terms like these for any period of time anyone else who comes in with a UNIX or NT "solution" sets off the BS detector. HP got to its current position by setting its own course and following it, come hell or high water. They didn't run after Abobe PostScript for their lasers and they didn't chase Intel or DEC for computers. They did things their way. Now of course, the HP WAY is officially dead, and HP now appears to be devoting its time to keeping the pension funds happy. Got keep those stock prices up no matter what it does to the company. Well, Chrysler tried that and it doesn't work. It nearly killed them and it is going to hurt HP too. But after all, what does my opinion matter? I'm only a customer, and we know that customers are way down on HP's priority list. Numbero uno are propects, people with money to spend. Customers are just former prospects whose money you already have, what do they matter? As for the HP3000, why sell a machine that will probably outlast the life span of the company buying it when you can sell something that the client is just going to have to replace in two or three years? Why sell an operating system that really doesn't need support when you can flog something that is going to generate support revenue? Why sell a complete package when you can get some mug to buy it a piece at a time at twice the price because its "open" (open ended committment is more like it)? E.T. Barnum would be proud. I can see it now, "HP kills 3000 line to preserve corporate profits". Ahhhh, some day I just get so damned depressed with it all. Regards, -- James B. Byrne mailto:[log in to unmask] Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca Hamilton, Ontario 905-561-1241