The Ne[w|utered] HP (was: RE: The effects of employment)

From: Fred N. van Kempen <>
Date: Thu Dec 12 16:18:01 2002

Dan wrote:

> Well...definitly better then the Itanium boxes. But it's pretty much a big PC,
> with the build quality that would imply. kind of disappointing, compared to
> their older workstations...

> I'm really just disappointed overall with their decision to kill Alpha and
> PA-RISC. Itanium really isn't that good, at least not yet, and they're going
> to lose a LOT of customers by doing it.

**THAT** was my point, yes. Enterprise customers kinda laugh at the idea of their
stuff being of the "Intel Inside" kind, and will be almost impossible to be changed
into that. They'll go Sun, or IBM, but will do pretty much anything to NOT be
sucked into this "New Big PC crap", as one of them called it.

In the old days, we had Sun, DEC, Compaq, HP and IBM for the larger systems. DEC
got sucked into Compaq, which also had Tandem. That seemed like not such a bad
plan, and it could have worked (my personal opinion.) Now, we loose both DEC/Compaq
(so, Tru64/Alpha and VMS/Alpha) and HP (HPUX/HPPA), only to get... _MORE_ Intel
crap into this world.

Don't get me wrong- I like my PC's. And yes, some of them run Win2000, some do
UNIX, whatever. But that's *PC* stuff, for PC tasks. My customers will probably
invite me in to come and tell them which vendor of "real" Big Things (tm) they can
switch to now, without the chance of having to do that again in two years from
now. So... Sun (sigh) or IBM (eek) ?

HP loses.. bigtime. And as a shareholder.. indeed, i voted 'no' :)

#define NHP /*brainless*/
#define HP NHP

Received on Thu Dec 12 2002 - 16:18:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:40 BST