Ron, I couldn't agree with you more. One of the most difficult things for good technologists to do is separate their love for the technology and the business needs and requirements. Certainly the HP3000 will support many current and future business needs. On the other hand, other platforms may provide better functionality for differing and changing business requirements. kevin leininger devtech associates =================== To: HP3000-L @ UTCVM.UTC.EDU (Multiple recipients of list HP3000-L) @ Internet cc: (bcc: Kevin Leininger/DevTech Associates) From: rseybold @ ZILKER.NET (Ron Seybold) @ Internet Date: 07/27/96 10:56:27 AM Subject: Re: HP3000/Unix list Hello Friends: Thomas A Harmon said: "It does seem inevitable that the HP3000 and MPE are becoming "mature" products. It's not what I want either, but it just seems to be going that way!" It's up to all of us -- the press, customers and the 3000's supporters inside HP -- to change the definition of "mature" back to its original intent: stable, reliable products with no need for fiddling. Defining an entire platform as "mature" in the pejorative sense is going to fail if we resist the old definition. We all do that by thinking of our 3000s as vital, growing resources in our companies. I'd recommend mature products anyday over immature ones. The former increase productivity. The latter only increase expectations. Ron Seybold, Editor In Chief The 3000 NewsWire Independent Information to Maximize Your HP3000 [log in to unmask] 512-331-0075