1) I'm suprised Bob Supnik had a negative response from HP on the 2000 stuff, since they DID in fact make the source code for HP2000/TSB available (for a fee, but nontheless), even before they end-of-lifed the O/S. 2) Someone mentioned to me privately about an emulator for the 3000, thinking it might be hard. It's probably not that hard for the 3000. I am writing a 2100/21MX emulator that supports multiple cpus, any number of interface card and firmware add-in (software) modules, etc. from scratch. It's probably 2/3rds complete, somewhat functional, and really didn't take that long. Unless there is something terribly unique about the 3000 architecture (which I know zilch about), I can't imagine it would be that hard. 3) The story I'm getting from HP on the 3000 migration path, is Unix Unix Unix. However, since I seem to be one of the few on the list who really LIKES unix, perhaps I'm in the minority in thinking that this isn't a bad thing. Jay West ----- Original Message ----- From: Douglas Quebbeman <dhquebbeman(a)theestopinalgroup.com> To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:29 PM Subject: RE: HP 3000 No More > > According to the press release, they want you to migrate to 9000's or > > their PC servers products. > > > > As for MPE on other platforms.. tempting. They should open source the > > whole damn thing. That would be an *interesting* read. > > fat chance. A group tried to liberate Domain/OS, which they didn't > even write, to no avail... I think Bob Supnik had the same response > from them regarding the HP2000/2100 software. > > Suits. Can't live with 'em, probably couldn't live without 'em. > > -dq >

2) Someone mentioned to me privately about an emulator for the 3000, thinking it might be hard. It's probably not that hard for the 3000. I am

3) The story I'm getting from HP on the 3000 migration path, is Unix Unix Unix. However, since I seem to be one of the few on the list who really