Bumped into an old friend from HP last night who's a support manager. He's desparately sending out his resume in anticipation of the next axe-cutting.
Sadly, when I asked him about morale in his group, his response was "what morale?" He said on a 1-10 scale morale was about a negative 2.
We all know Carly has no real clue, but it doesn't take an MBA in Human Resources to realize that two years of quarterly purges destroys morale and productivity. Reminds me of a Harvard Bus. Review article a few years back about companies in a "death spiral".
Yes, I did not mean to imply that all those systems were continuing. There is also the (used to be Tandem) Non Stop system that I think will continue. Those are the systems you need if you can't afford any down time.
The Tru64 clustering (and cluster file system, to, I think) are being rolled into HP-UX and not much else. Its to bad that more of T64 is not going to be added to HP-UX. I liked the T64 internationalization support, for example. Networking and a few other things also seems to be better on T64, too.
Correct, with the exception of Tru-64. That's being phased out fairly quickly. VMS and HP-UX are the OS's HP is going forward with. VMS is already on Itanium and will roll out next spring if I remember correctly. Both Os's are the true Enterprise stuff with the least risk associated with them from an IT standpoint.
The good features of Tru-64 are being rolled into HP-UX, so Tru-64 lovers are not being left behind either.
> When Microsoft can show me some uptime numbers like that
That's why operating systems like Tru64 UNIX, HP-UX, and VMS will always win at sites that can never go down. With networked RAID storage, clustered processors and rolling upgrades of software that are all available now, systems need never go down, baring power supply problems.
you can make great money selling and supporting these systems to those who need them. But don't ever think that you can get away with just selling these highend systems and ignoring everything else. DEC did that and went out for business because they ignored things they should have been paying attention to (like PCs). But DEC's VMS is still with us because it could be depended on to never go down.
Well, here's one... A company I work with here installed 26 servers using a package from CPQ which has 2 servers and a storage unit all in one box and uses the MS 'cluster' package. None of the 26 has been down for even a second since installation, over 5 years now.
I don't argue that in general big Unix systems are easier to administer and more relaible than most MS based server systems. But the primary reason for that is that the range of things the MS servers do on the low end is done with cheap hardware and configurations that are simply not done with Unix because of economics. People willing to think about the design a little and spend an equivalent amount of money can get reliable MS systems.
I remember when we added some MS Servers, the MS folks couldn't understand that the Unix servers didn't need re-booting on a regular basis (i.e., at least once per day, if not more). Wow! Might be a little better now, but how much???
Keep moving those boxes!!!
I havent dealt with them for years, they had good management in the 90s - don't know if they are still there. They are just kindof bubbling under the economic surface from what I can tell. Haven't run into them in about 3 years if that has any significance....