goldfish@concour.cs.concordia.ca (06/18/91)
stuff deleted ... | We think that input from our customers is invaluable when it comes | to making the best possible business decisions. As you might | already be aware, the primary channel for this communication is | and has been the Apollo Domain User Society (ADUS) of which there are | nearly 7,000 members worldwide. | | We have chosen to focus our dialogue through this organization. ... stuff deleted ... | become an active member of the ADUS community. For information about | how to join ADUS, please contact your local HP Sales Representative or | call Carol Relph at HP in Chelmsford, Mass., at (508) 256-6600, | extension 7646. | | Sincerely, | | Mark E. Tolliver | Marketing Manager | Hewlett-Packard Workstation Systems Division sir: I appreciate that HP wishes to disseminate its information through a vehicle which is subject to greater influence by HP than the USENET community, however, not everyone has the option of spending a week in San Francisco at their company's expense. One of the most valuable aspects of USENET in general and the Apollo group is its informal nature and high level of expertises, and volume of useful information. You need look no further than the two letters which have originated from this group to see that we are, by and large, an articulate, cohesive, community of experienced Apollo/Domain users, systems administrators, and developers. Those who participate in this group do so of interest, and the fact that USENET can be accessed in a more timely and inexpensive manner than an ADUS conference in San Francisco, argues that it is a better vehicle for dissemination of time critical information than conferences. This reaches a larger segment of Apollo community, and it operates continuously. Almost any document on almost any networked computer can be fed into this group with no greater difficulty than the letter that I am responding to. It is incongruous that HP purports to support networking philosophy when it so vigorously avoiding the use of existing, available, technology to communicate with its user community. I put your suggestion, quoted above, back to you, HP should become an active member of the USENET community. This is not to say that ADUS does not have a place in the Apollo user community, just that electronic communications are a fact of this century and other manufacturers are not ignoring it. Yours very truly, -- Paul Goldsmith <goldfish@concour.cs.concordia.ca> (514) 848-3031 (Shirley Maclaine told me there would be LIFETIMES like this) the future isn't what it used to be; and possibly, never was (ao)
thompson@PAN.SSEC.HONEYWELL.COM (John Thompson) (06/18/91)
Well, HP/Apollo responded (if you can call it that). Since it appears that they did not send to the comp.sys.apollo mailing list, I am assuming that it did not get posted there, and so I'm including it in full. My comments come after it. > TO: Hewlett-Packard Domain Customers > FROM: Hewlett-Packard Company > SUBJ: Response to May 20, 1991 Open Letter > DATE: June 14, 1991 > _________________________________________________________________ > > Thank you for your recent letter concerning some of HP's business > strategies. Clearly, you invested a great deal of time and effort > in the letter and your thoughtful presentation of problems and > potential solutions is greatly appreciated. > > We think that input from our customers is invaluable when it comes > to making the best possible business decisions. As you might > already be aware, the primary channel for this communication is > and has been the Apollo Domain User Society (ADUS) of which there are > nearly 7,000 members worldwide. > > We have chosen to focus our dialogue through this organization. > > ADUS conferences draw members from all over the world. The next > ADUS conference will be held Aug. 4-8 in San Diego and will address all > of the issues that were raised in your letter. The conference > provides ADUS members with the forum to exchange ideas > with each other and with HP's technology experts. > > HP also works closely with the ADUS Board of Directors > on an on-going basis to discuss members' concerns and ideas. > The conference and other communication vehicles, such as the ADUS > Ring Newsletter, will continue to be used to keep members up to date > on workstation issues. > > The specific issues you raised will be addressed as follows: > > o The future of the Apollo DN10000 will be addressed at management > strategy presentations and roundtables; > > o Support of Domain/OS will be addressed at a Domain/OS 10.4 forum; > > o HP OS migration to OSF/1 will be addressed at the OSF/1 features > update session; > > In addition, during the four-day conference we will cover related topics > at breakout technical sessions, tutorials and at an R&D management panel > Q&A. These topics will include: > > o Strategy on Motorola and PA-RISC; > > o System administration; > > o NewWave Computing; > > o New language technologies; > > o Peripherals; > > o Networks, and > > o Graphics. > > We encourage you to attend the ADUS Conference or, at the very least, > become an active member of the ADUS community. For information about > how to join ADUS, please contact your local HP Sales Representative or > call Carol Relph at HP in Chelmsford, Mass., at (508) 256-6600, > extension 7646. > > Sincerely, > > Mark E. Tolliver > Marketing Manager > Hewlett-Packard Workstation Systems Division I got an early copy of this letter from Jack Novia, and had a talk with him and with Anita Reiner on what I thought of it. Suffice it to say that I don't think much of this response. Anita mentioned that they might be coming out with an updated response in a while, but said that getting a new 'official' HP response would not be quick (true enough). What I told Jack and Anita: o This non-response is not satisfactory. Whether true or not, it sounds like HP/Apollo is putting us off for a month and a half. All of the issues we brought up are time-critical. If HP/Apollo goes along their merry way, and then gets users complaining, they can (will?) say that at this point, it's too late to change anything. This is already true for Domain/OS on the PA-RISC architecture. Whether it _IS_ do-able or not, it _WAS_ too late when we found out about it to get HP to start the port -- the timeframe didn't make sense any more. o Although I agree that ADUS is a good funnel-point for user input, I do not agree that it should be the only one. Using the same argument, HP could refuse to accept problem reports unless a lot of users all complained. They have the technical support line because there are problems that are found by individual users/companies that need to be dealt with. o It is much easier for me to attend USENET than it is to attend ADUS. In this time of tight budgets, travel to conferences gets axed easily. I can almost certainly reach more people via USENET, as well. (In addition, would ADUS be able to handle large membership numbers (10X current) and large attendences at conferences?) o ADUS has major meetings twice per year. Too often, we find out about specific changes in press releases (or between the lines of those releases) that don't coincide with conferences. ADUS conferences are fine for presenting broad, sweeping topics, but the specifics are often ironed out afterward. If those specific implementation details do not match what we as ADUS users expect, then waht are we to do? o The ADUS Ring is published monthly (I think), and so, with a good, fast, turnaround, might be able to address a topic in 3 months. A more likely timeframe is 4 to 6 months. By that time, the entire playing field can be different. There needs to be a quick-action interface as well. o If we don't have any idea what HP/Apollo's position is on the three topics from the letter, then the best we can give to an ADUS presentation is a knee-jerk, gut-feeling opinion. It may be that that knee-jerk is wrong. If it's wrong, but we convince HP/Apollo to change their plans, we all lose. If it's right, and we fail to convince HP/Apollo to change their plans because of insufficient support, then we lose, and HP loses afterward. o The VERY LEAST we need is to have HP/Apollo's initial position on these issues. I think that it's important enough and (now) current enough that they should be able to give expected dates for the support and inter- operability issues. I'd hope that they'd have a (relatively) complete understanding concerning the DN10000 future. The fuzzy, hand-waving, rosy-timeframe view presented in the Domain/OS white paper is not good enough. We need to know 'what.' We need to know 'when.' We need to know 'how.' We need to know 'why.' o We took the time to write the letter because we wanted to hear a response. All this reply is is rhetoric. -- jt -- John Thompson Honeywell, SSEC Plymouth, MN 55441 thompson@pan.ssec.honeywell.com When in danger, when in doubt -- run in circles, scream and shout.
wjw@ebh.eb.ele.tue.nl (Willem Jan Withagen) (06/18/91)
In article <9106172251.AA05357@pan.ssec.honeywell.com>, thompson@PAN.SSEC.HONEYWELL.COM (John Thompson) writes:
=>
=> Well, HP/Apollo responded (if you can call it that). Since it appears that
=> they did not send to the comp.sys.apollo mailing list, I am assuming that
=> come after it.
=>
=> > TO: Hewlett-Packard Domain Customers
=> > FROM: Hewlett-Packard Company
=> > SUBJ: Response to May 20, 1991 Open Letter
=> > DATE: June 14, 1991
I'm not going to be suprissed by all this any longer. Last week I received
documentation for snakes, and they have the same tone:
Apollo users should not complain, they are getting HP-stuff.
It's horibly cheap and fast. It's not what you want but who cares
Well, as far as I'm concerned: It sucks!
As far as I know is our group a member of ADUS, but I can't remember
seeing ever any Newsletter. (excuses are due if this turns out to be false )
And even if we are, it is more than impolite to ignore most of the
people supporting the Open Letter.
Willem Jan
--
Eindhoven University of Technology DomainName: wjw@eb.ele.tue.nl
Digital Systems Group, Room EH 10.10
P.O. 513 Tel: +31-40-473401
5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlandsdennis@nosc.mil (Dennis Cottel) (06/18/91)
thompson@PAN.SSEC.HONEYWELL.COM (John Thompson) writes: > Well, HP/Apollo responded (if you can call it that). Since it appears that > they did not send to the comp.sys.apollo mailing list, I am assuming that > it did not get posted there, and so I'm including it in full. Thanks for doing so -- I wouldn't have seen it otherwise. Your follow-up points are well-written and I agree with them. The response reads as if they typed in the ADUS brochure and gave it no more thought. I kept expecting to see a description of hotel accommodations. There is no possibility that our 60 or 70 Apollo users will be able to attend an ADUS conference. We couldn't even get the main system manager to New Orleans. However, the future of their workstations affects the professional life of every one of the users, and many are concerned about that future. Usenet provides an unmatched capability for a timely discussion of these issues. Dennis Cottel, dennis@NOSC.MIL, (619) 553-1645 Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA 92152
krowitz@RICHTER.MIT.EDU (David Krowitz) (06/19/91)
If you are not receiving your ADUS newsletter, send email to relph_c@apollo.com (Carol Relph) and check that your address is correct in the mailing label database. We have also had a problem with large organizations (mostly US corporations) which have mail rooms that insist on throwing out all bulk mailings ... so if we send (say, hypothetically) 200 copies of the newsletter to the ADUS members at the Big Airplane Co. of Walawala Washington, the BAC mail room throws 200 copies into the trash, even though each copy is individually addressed with the full address and mail-stop. == Dave
tjohn@GUMBY.CFSMO.HONEYWELL.COM ("Tony John") (06/19/91)
Well, I've sat on my hands long enough. This is definitly a knee-jerk reaction. (FLAME ON) This is directed to all of HP management that has anything to do with the direction and marketing of HP/Apollo workstations, not to the engineers and programmers that develop and support these systems and give us real answers to our questions, not some rhetoric propaganda. I can't believe your response to the USENET letter. That isn't a response, it's a copout. What do you people take us for, first graders? Does HP care about its customers at all? If you do, then why aren't you listening to us!!!!!! I know that if (that's a BIG IF) I do get to go to ADUS, I'm bringing my hip boots because of all the bull I'll have to wade through to find any truth in what HP is saying. I've been using and supporting Apollo workstations since 1983, (I even saw a DN100 in the local Apollo office once) and I've never seen such a rotten attitude toward customers. Quit treating us like kids and give us credit for knowing something about the workstations we use. I've learned more about Apollo workstations and Domain/OS in this group than any ADUS conference that I attended. Have you noticed that when the first USENET letter went out, it looked like HP management was going to listen to us and try to meet our needs on support. Now it looks like HP has gone back to ignoring us again. (Why else would we be working on another letter?) man What ever happened to the ftp/archive site that HP said they were going to have? Does anyone in the HP management monitor this group anymore? It sure doesn't look like it. HP saying that the "standard is better" is a bunch of crap. Look what IBM and Sun did. MS/DOS and NFS are so-called "standards" because users saw what they liked and the two companies promoted the hell out of the products saying they were "standard". Why can't HP say the same thing? They're almost as big as IBM and bigger than Sun, they ought to be able to promote a product or did they cut the advertising budget, or are they afraid to step on some toes? It's very clear to me that in the time since HP purchased Apollo, HP management still doesn't understand what they bought. It's really becoming apparent that HP is another one of those U.S. companies that doesn't listen to their customers, and probably doesn't even know who there customers are. The reason we purchase a certain workstation and application software is that it fits our design process, and helps us design and produce a product faster, better, and cheaper than the competition. All we want to do is get the job done. When you stop listening to your customer, you start losing market share, and we look to other workstation and software vendors for help. HP management, this is what you're doing, not listening to your customer, and if you don't start listening, we _WILL_ start going to other vendors for help. (FLAME OFF) ===================================================================== Tony John Honeywell Commercial Flight Systems 612-785-4256 MN51-1320 8840 Evergreen Blvd. tjohn@gumby.cfsmo.honeywell.com Coon Rapids, MN 55433 When I was younger, I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not; but my faculties are decaying now and soon I shall be so I cannot remember any but the things that never happened. It is sad to go to pieces like this but we all have to do it. -- Mark Twain =====================================================================
schuh@demon.siemens.com (Christian Schuh) (06/19/91)
In article: <9106172251.AA05357@pan.ssec.honeywell.com> John Thompson writes: >Well, HP/Apollo responded (if you can call it that). Since it appears that >they did not send to the comp.sys.apollo mailing list, I am assuming that >it did not get posted there, and so I'm including it in full. My comments >come after it. Thanks - the reply wasn't sent to the Usenet, even though the letter originated from the net, so I guess most of us would have never seen it. But looking at the response, I think it doesn't make a difference anyways... :-( My 3.6 Pfennige (= $0.02) worth: >> TO: Hewlett-Packard Domain Customers >> FROM: Hewlett-Packard Company >> SUBJ: Response to May 20, 1991 Open Letter >> DATE: June 14, 1991 >> _________________________________________________________________ >> >> Thank you for your recent letter concerning some of HP's business >> strategies. Clearly, you invested a great deal of time and effort >> in the letter and your thoughtful presentation of problems and >> potential solutions is greatly appreciated. Well, clearly HP did not invest a great deal of time and effort dealing with our questions. This response does not include any potential solutions, and its presentation can hardly be considered thoughtful. >> We think that input from our customers is invaluable when it comes >> to making the best possible business decisions. As you might >> already be aware, the primary channel for this communication is >> and has been the Apollo Domain User Society (ADUS) of which there are >> nearly 7,000 members worldwide. 7,000 ADUS members is nice. But what about the many more thousand Usenet users, ADUS members or not, who represent IMHO a much broader base of Domain- users? How long can HP get away with pointing us to ADUS instead of recognizing the 'net' and its usefulness in the communication between HP and its users? >> We have chosen to focus our dialogue through this organization. Ohhhh - excuse us. Well maybe next time we chose to focus our dialogue on a different vendor alltogether. This should be great for HP. No more user questions to bother with... [Sorry about the sarcasm, but what else is left?] >> ADUS conferences draw members from all over the world. The next >> ADUS conference will be held Aug. 4-8 in San Diego and will address all >> of the issues that were raised in your letter. The conference >> provides ADUS members with the forum to exchange ideas >> with each other and with HP's technology experts. Thanks for the lecture about ADUS - we knew that. But we didn't ask for that. Not everybody has the money to spend on trips to San Diego, so telling people to go to the conference or getting the answers through ADUS otherwise is not appropriate. But in a way this is an answer. Since most of the presentation for the ADUS conference are probably already written, the answer probably is: "No changes. Get with the program, or get lost." I just remember the answers given to me regarding the DN10000 situation at the ADUS Midatlantic Chapter meeting not long ago, and it makes me shudder just to think about what the answers might be in San Diego. [I'll go there, but I honestly don't expect any breathtaking changes. I expect a lot of HP hype in conjunction with Interex, which will make look ADUS real small - but that's a different thread.] >> The specific issues you raised will be addressed as follows: >> >> o The future of the Apollo DN10000 will be addressed at management >> strategy presentations and roundtables; >> >> o Support of Domain/OS will be addressed at a Domain/OS 10.4 forum; >> >> o HP OS migration to OSF/1 will be addressed at the OSF/1 features >> update session; [20 more lines from the glossy ADUS conference brochure deleted] Thanks so much for the excerpt of the ADUS brochure. Again - we didn't ask for that. We asked specific questions. We expect specific answers. > Sincerely, > > Mark E. Tolliver > Marketing Manager > Hewlett-Packard Workstation Systems Division John, I deleted your good replies to the HP folk for brevity. I agree, that ADUS has its merits, that's why our organization is a member. But it shouldn't be the sole mean of communication between user and vendor. HP should not ignore the large community of Usenet users any longer. Especially not, if a request clearly originates from the Usenet community and not ADUS. Thanks again for all your effort. It is easy to just give up, it is hard to stay with it and fight. >John Thompson >Honeywell, SSEC >thompson@pan.ssec.honeywell.com Christian Schuh, Siemens Corp. Research Princeton, NJ; schuh@siemens.siemens.com Proud administrator of a DN10020 mini supercomputer =*-[ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "What once was is no more, the story is ending, what once was is no more, and never will be again." ---------------------------------------Tommy Conwell and the Young Rumblers-----
ianh@resmel.bhp.com.au (Ian Hoyle) (06/19/91)
thompson@PAN.SSEC.HONEYWELL.COM (John Thompson) writes: >Well, HP/Apollo responded (if you can call it that). Since it appears that >they did not send to the comp.sys.apollo mailing list, I am assuming that >it did not get posted there, and so I'm including it in full. My comments >come after it. Significant flame here .... Well I've read the response that John forwarded to USEnet and have also looked at some of the responses that others have already made. I don't know what to say really. I'm disillusioned and very pissed off with how Hewlett Packard is treating this particular community of users. Sure, I can't get to any ADUS conference (it *is* on the other side of the planet after all - hell, there are actually users well away from the US and Europe) and I do get ADUS Ring (but everything in that is just waffle - sorry to offend contributors :-). USEnet is about timely information. It is about information exchange between past users (lots of ex-apollo engineers out there who *still* make the effort to help out for a product that at least *they* have pride in), the present customer base, and other interested parties who look "over our shoulders" at some of the dialogue that goes on in comp.sys.apollo. To say "We have chosen to focus our dialogue through this organization. (ADUS)" is bullshit. Sigh, if I continue this note it will get out out of control because I'm damn mad.!!!! The last, saddest bit I leave to the end. Last week I had a DEC rep wave the latest "Open Letter" in my face having printed it out for himself - remembering that all we say here is public fodder anyway. He just laughed at me, wondering what HP is going to do about my poor, 4 processor DN10000 now. I guess DEC, (and SiliconGraphics who we by lots from) are just rubbing their hands waiting for all the current 10000 users to turn from HP in disgust. ian PS oh yes, this is ME speaking, and not these laboratories. ;-) -- Ian Hoyle /\/\ Image Processing & Data Analysis Group / / /\ BHP Research - Melbourne Laboratories / / / \ 245 Wellington Rd, Mulgrave, 3170 / / / /\ \ AUSTRALIA \ \/ / / / \ / / / Phone : +61-3-560-7066 \/\/\/ FAX : +61-3-561-6709 E-mail : ianh@resmel.bhp.com.au
mike@vlsivie.tuwien.ac.at (Michael Gschwind) (06/20/91)
> TO: Hewlett-Packard Domain Customers > FROM: Hewlett-Packard Company > SUBJ: Response to May 20, 1991 Open Letter > DATE: June 14, 1991 > [marketing junk deleted] Please what's the contant of this letter! Sounded like 'Wait & See'. But we've waited long enough! bye, mike PS: Talking about waiting: On Sept 7., 1990, we ordered a HP/Apollo 9000/ Series 400t plus 040 upgrade kit, including OS. Originally the 400t was promised for Sebtember or October, the upgrade kit for November or December. What really happened was that we received the 400t at the end of November. It did not come with an operating system, nor with PSK7 for SR10.2. PSK7 was no longer available, because 10.3 was already shipped in the U.S. We did however NOT get 10.3, because we had ordered 10.3 with the upgrade kit, but not the workstation. It took some time, then we finally received a copy of the PSK7. Next cam a _looooooong_ waiting period for the upgrade. Mid-April, the upgrade finally arrived. It arrived with a PSK, to be applied to SR 10.3. What did not arrive was sr 10.3. Just a quick phone call to the Austrian HP/Apollo offices. "You've forgotten to deliver sr 10.3" - "SR10.2 plus PSK7 is just as good" - "??? !@#$%^&*()" - "No, really, PSK7 fixed _all_ sr 10.2 problems, use sr10.2". OK, forget it. Our sys admin finally finds a technician who explains our friendly HP/Apollo rep. that indeed sr 10.3 is necessary to run a 425. (We must we find someone who explains the HP/Apollo people how to use their equipment????). Next step: since HP already has marked our order as delivered, there thh friendly HP rep. asks us to fax him a formal complaint that the contract has not been fulfilled. To this day (mid-April to mid-June) we are still waiting for SR 10.3 to be able to use the 040. -- Michael Gschwind, Dept. of VLSI-Design, Vienna University of Technology mike@vlsivie.tuwien.ac.at 1-2-3-4 kick the lawsuits out the door mike@vlsivie.uucp 5-6-7-8 innovate don't litigate e182202@awituw01.bitnet 9-A-B-C interfaces should be free Voice: (++43).1.58801 8144 D-E-F-O look and feel has got to go! Fax: (++43).1.569697
edwill@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Glenn L. Williams) (06/21/91)
In article <9106181731.AA06220@richter.mit.edu>, krowitz@RICHTER.MIT.EDU (David Krowitz) writes... >If you are not receiving your ADUS newsletter, send email to >relph_c@apollo.com (Carol Relph) and check that your address >is correct in the mailing label database. We have also had >a problem with large organizations (mostly US corporations) >which have mail rooms that insist on throwing out all bulk >mailings ... so if we send (say, hypothetically) 200 copies >of the newsletter to the ADUS members at the Big Airplane Co. >of Walawala Washington, the BAC mail room throws 200 copies >into the trash, even though each copy is individually addressed >with the full address and mail-stop. > >== Dave Although we are on USENET, I suspect some industrial customers out there are NOT. So, if they can't get the mail and can't get the E-mail, they _could_be_ poorly represented. And I'm sure not everyone's employer is ready for one to hop a plane to ADUS. So, USENET is still a good forum...
thompson@PAN.SSEC.HONEYWELL.COM (John Thompson) (06/22/91)
I suddenly had a thought. (Intelligence -- what a concept) I had forgotten what the exact reply from HP/Apollo had been to USENET LETTER 1. Since I'm a pack-rat at heart, the reply has been sitting in my current-issues mail folder for lo these many moons. Let's just see what they had to say back then -- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ... > Hewlett-Packard appreciates that electronic services are > very important to workstation customers. HP is committed to > creating and delivering services that meet your needs and > help your productivity. > > Currently, HP's strategic investment in electronic services > is HP SupportLine. HP SupportLine is .... > HP wants to make HP SupportLine available to those > customers, via the Internet. Clearly, the Internet is very > important, because it is a de facto communications network > standard among a large number of our workstation customers. > ... > > HP is committed to providing the best support in the industry and > continually gets a high ranking for customer satisfaction. We > have done this by listening to our customers inputs and > responding to your needs, both in terms of product quality and in > support processes. The upcoming ADUS conference in San Diego > will provide further opportunities to better understand customer > needs, and HP will be well represented there. We value your > input and thank you for the time and effort that went into the > Open Letter. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hmmmm. HP is committed to creating and delivering services that meet our needs? Well, we have a need here. Hmmmm. HP says that the Internet is very important, and is a network standard among a large number of customers? Seems to me that HP/Apollo should be leading the industry in conforming with standards. After all, "Better isn't better -- standard is better." It appears that we may have to revamp that phrase a little bit. Maybe it should be "Better isn't better -- our whim is better." That doesn't seem to roll off the tongue as cleanly though. HP has done this (gets high ranking on customer satisfaction) by listening to their customers' inputs and responding to their needs? Well, it seems that you listened. Where's your response? Some people have seen this letter as a DN10000 future and support letter. That's partially true, as the lack of a future is very important to the high- end user. However, it's much more than that, and this touches on the comments that HP should be aggressively pushing the 700 series (as they are) -- o HP/Apollo _should_ be pushing a transition to OSF and the 700 series. To not do so would be negligent. o HP/Apollo needs to be extending Domain/OS in this transition period. This was stressed in 'Issue 2' of the letter. We need to be able to talk to the OSF systems from Domain/OS, and we need to access the Domain/OS systems from the new, whiz-bang boxes that HP/Apollo would like us to buy. What were we offered? No interoperability until late 1991, limited interoperability until mid-late 1992, and reasonable interoperability (though certainly not what we'd want to have) a year and a half after the 700 series was released! In a year and a half, the system will be a run-of-the-mill 60 MIPS machine -- nothing compared to the gazillion MIPS, GFLOP, $4995 system that WhizBang Computers, Inc will have out by then. (In short, it'll be obsolete, old-hat equipment.) o HP/Apollo needs to be pushing a _transition_, not a blind leap. This was stressed in 'Issue 3' of the letter. As Domain users, we cannot just push everybody onto an OSF system today -- even if it were available. We will need to be on Domain/OS for quite some time (multiple years), but we can't just stay on our current hardware, or even the 9000/400 series nodes. We need the power, and we need to support other people, who may be going to OSF altogether. -- jt -- John Thompson Honeywell, SSEC Plymouth, MN 55441 thompson@pan.ssec.honeywell.com Avoid the rush -- Procrastinate Now!