FERGUSON@TMASL.EXXON.COM (06/01/89)
I just read a small portion of Electronic News, saying that HP executives
have acknowledged plans to phase out the DN10000 in the next few years.
The article also states:
"Lewis E. Platt, HP executive vice president for the Computer Products
Sector, said once Apollo operations are merged into HP's Workstation
group, up to 750 people, or 17 percent of Apollo's current workforce,
could face layoffs."
My Apollo sales rep has been emphatically telling me I should buy a 10000,
because 1) the future of the product is so bright, and 2) No other
company can give you the stability and support that HP/Apollo can.
What's wrong with this picture?
What do others think about this?
Scott Ferguson
Exxon Corporate Research
Annandale, NJ 08801adam@gvax.cs.cornell.edu (Adam Feigin) (06/02/89)
In article <8906020235.AA00380@umix.cc.umich.edu> FERGUSON@TMASL.EXXON.COM writes: > >I just read a small portion of Electronic News, saying that HP executives >have acknowledged plans to phase out the DN10000 in the next few years. >The article also states: > > "Lewis E. Platt, HP executive vice president for the Computer Products >Sector, said once Apollo operations are merged into HP's Workstation >group, up to 750 people, or 17 percent of Apollo's current workforce, >could face layoffs." > >My Apollo sales rep has been emphatically telling me I should buy a 10000, >because 1) the future of the product is so bright, and 2) No other >company can give you the stability and support that HP/Apollo can. > >What's wrong with this picture? >What do others think about this? There's nothing wrong with this picture, except for the fact that one should remember the following: "Believe nothing of what you hear/read, and only half of what you see" It is rumored that HP will announce "a multi-processor graphics machine" in the early summertime...sounds like a repackaged DN10K VS to me.....Besides, a top of the line HP 835 Turbo/SRX (or whatever it is called), costs A LOT more than a 10K, and doesn't perform nearly as well, so why would you buy one over a 10K ??? If they really do decide to drop the 10K after a few years, I believe they will find out rather quickly that they will LOSE market share, as people will start looking to other vendors (DEC, Sun, SGI) who have high performance, multi-processor boxes that can be expanded easily, and will be supported forever (almost) Standard disclaimers apply. See y'all in New Orleans ! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet: feigin@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu Adam Feigin Bitnet: feigin@crnlthry Workstation Consultant UUCP: {backbones}!cornell!batcomputer!feigin Cornell National Supercomputer
joshua@athertn.Atherton.COM (Flame Bait) (06/03/89)
In an article FERGUSON@TMASL.EXXON.COM writes: >My Apollo sales rep has been emphatically telling me I should buy a 10000, >because 1) the future of the product is so bright, and 2) No other >company can give you the stability and support that HP/Apollo can. > >What's wrong with this picture? >What do others think about this? HP/Apollo has four major OS's (3 versions of UNIX and AEGIS) and four major hardware platforms (HP's 68K and SPECTRUM, and Apollo's 68K and PRISM). Clearly, some platforms and OSs are going to go, and HP people are going to choose what lives and what dies. They own the company, after all. For these reasons, I believe that quote number 1 above is wishful thinking. Quote number 2 is just sales talk. Ignore it. Sun, DEC and IBM can all provide the about same level of stability and support (DEC and IBM a little more stablity than Sun or HP/Apollo). Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? Joshua Levy -------- Quote: "If you haven't ported your program, it's not Addresses: a portable program. No exceptions." joshua@atherton.com OR sun!athertn!joshua OR {backbone}!{decwrl!hpda}!athertn!joshua work:(408)734-9822 home:(415)968-3718
wunder@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM (Walter Underwood) (06/06/89)
Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? Joshua Levy Better for what? HP-PA (Sinclar makes Spectrum computers) is good at context switch and IO, and has a lot of headroom for parallell and fault-tolerant stuff (see the public architecture documents). PRISM is optimised for straight-line, "don't interrupt me" computation. They may not be directly competing architectures. I'm not making the decision, of course. wunder
wescott@LNIC1.HPRC.UH.EDU (Andrew M. Wescott) (06/06/89)
We found it to be not much of a contest.... From a very biased DN10000VS supporter, Andrew Wescott University of Houston Department of Chemical Engineering
markley@celece.ucsd.edu (Mike Markley) (06/06/89)
In article <3960002@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM> wunder@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM (Walter Underwood) writes: > > Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? > > Joshua Levy > >Better for what? HP-PA (Sinclar makes Spectrum computers) is good at >context switch and IO, and has a lot of headroom for parallell and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is interesting. All of the articles that I have read show Apollo fairly far ahead of HP in the area of context switching and multi-tasking. The Apollo DN4500 even context switched better than the HP370 and 390 minis. Mike Markley University of California, San Diego markley@celece.ucsd.edu markley@kubrick.ucsd.edu
jima@hplsla.HP.COM (Jim Adcock) (06/07/89)
> HP/Apollo has four major OS's (3 versions of UNIX and AEGIS) and four > major hardware platforms (HP's 68K and SPECTRUM, and Apollo's 68K and > PRISM). The HP 680x0 Un*xs and the series 800 Un*x are very, very similar, and are headed in the same direction as Apollos. In a year or so these will all be OSF/1. As may be DEC and IBM. > Clearly, some platforms and OSs are going to go, and HP people > are going to choose what lives and what dies. They own the company, > after all. Apollo people are HP people now, one of several HP computer divisions. Each HP division has considerable autonomy, but there are attempts to minimize turf battles and product overlaps between divisions. I believe the Apollo people are well respected within HP for their technical capabilities, so I believe Apollo will come out well in these coordination efforts. In any case, HP cannot afford to negatively impact either customers who have traditionally been "Apollo" or "HP" by these coordination efforts. One area where effort is going to be coordinated is in the 68040 new product area. But 68040 upgrades will be available for both series300 and Apollo users. The end result is that both HP and Apollo customers will have a wider choice of hardware to run on, a wider choice of software to run on it, and more people available to help support the combined hardware and software. > Quote number 2 is just sales talk. Ignore it. Don't ignore it, hold HP to it! If HP lets you down in this area squawk to high heaven! ...but... many computer magazine surveys put HP #1 in these areas. > Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? I believe that both are technically very good designs, and should be supported. PRISM has unique capabilities that are admired. Further, I believe as we head more and more towards "Open Software" customers will feel less and less locked into a particular CPU design, and will have much greater flexibility in choosing the hardware they run on. Without a lock on customers, computer vendors will have to be even better at providing speed, reliability, low cost, and support. As an internal user of HP computers, I'm very excited about being able to use Apollo hardware and software! [not "official" pronouncements -- I'm just another grunt user]
mike@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Mike McNelly) (06/07/89)
> In article <3960002@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM> wunder@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM (Walter Underwood) writes: > > > > Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? > > > > Joshua Levy > > > >Better for what? HP-PA (Sinclar makes Spectrum computers) is good at > >context switch and IO, and has a lot of headroom for parallell and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > This is interesting. All of the articles that I have read show > Apollo fairly far ahead of HP in the area of context switching > and multi-tasking. The Apollo DN4500 even context switched > better than the HP370 and 390 minis. Sorry but HP doesn't make a 390. The HP9000 Series 370 is currently the top of the Motorola 68030 based machines. BTW, be wary of what you read; religion frequently gets in the way of fact. > Mike Markley > University of California, San Diego > markley@celece.ucsd.edu > markley@kubrick.ucsd.edu Mike McNelly mike%hpfcla@hplabs.hp.com
campbelr@hpclove.HP.COM (Bob Campbell) (06/08/89)
> . . . . . . . . . The Apollo DN4500 even context switched > better than the HP370 and 390 minis. > > Mike Markley The reference was to the HP Precision Architecture (HP-PA) machines, the 9000 series 800 models. The 9000 series 300 models are Motorola 680[123]0 processors. There currently isn't a model 390. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Campbell Some times I wish that I could stop you from campbelr@hpda.hp.com talking, when I hear the silly things you say. Hewlett Packard - Elvis Costello
cricket@hp-ses.SDE.HP.COM (Cricket Liu) (06/08/89)
/ hp-ses:comp.sys.apollo / markley@celece.ucsd.edu (Mike Markley) / 8:10 am Jun 6, 1989 / [ quote from wunder deleted ] This is interesting. All of the articles that I have read show Apollo fairly far ahead of HP in the area of context switching and multi-tasking. The Apollo DN4500 even context switched better than the HP370 and 390 minis. Mike Markley University of California, San Diego markley@celece.ucsd.edu markley@kubrick.ucsd.edu ---------- Say what? I've never heard of either an HP370 or an HP390 mini. I do have an HP9000 model 370 *workstation* on my desk, though. Is that one of the models you meant? cricket
scottg@hp-ptp.HP.COM (Scott_Gulland) (06/08/89)
>> >> Interesting question: Which is technically better PRISM or SPECTRUM? >> >>Better for what? HP-PA (Sinclar makes Spectrum computers) is good at >>context switch and IO, and has a lot of headroom for parallell and > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > This is interesting. All of the articles that I have read show > Apollo fairly far ahead of HP in the area of context switching > and multi-tasking. The Apollo DN4500 even context switched > better than the HP370 and 390 minis. I not surprised, the HP370 is a 68000 based and is not part of the HP-PA family. The 390 on the other hand doesn't exist. scottg@hpiacla --------------