Re: HP to drop hpux?
From: jlsue (jefflsxxxz_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 06/27/03
- Next message: JF Mezei: "Re: OpenVMS Technical Seminar Highlights (some)"
- Previous message: Irving F. Snurd: "Re: PuTTY and SSH2 on OpenVMS - Not"
- In reply to: John Smith: "Re: HP to drop hpux?"
- Next in thread: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: HP to drop hpux?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 19:35:54 GMT
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:08:17 GMT, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:
>
>"Keith Parris" <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:cf15391e.0306260948.2479fb2d@posting.google.com...
>> HP's Linux sales now exceed $2B annually.
>
>Your statement is a bit disengenious. What is far closer to the truth
>is,
>"HP sells hardware that could run just about any o/s, but the customer
>chose to have Linux installed. HP sells $2B annually in this market
>but makes little money on the hardware, and zero ($0) on the sale of
>Linux per se, it being open source and obtained from 3rd parties (Red
>Hat, et. al.)."
No, you're wrong. If we sell servers that the customer plans to run Linux,
then it's a Linux sale. Same goes for storage and consulting services -
which we also provide to Linux environments.
Linux business contributes to our overall sales. $2B seems low to me,
actually.
>
>> So it's quite obvious that HP is serious about Linux, and about
>> helping it move forward.
>
>HP is serious about selling something for nothing.
>That is a recipie for long-term failure.
If they buy storage and consulting, it is not "something for nothing". In
fact, even if we sell a server it's not.
- Next message: JF Mezei: "Re: OpenVMS Technical Seminar Highlights (some)"
- Previous message: Irving F. Snurd: "Re: PuTTY and SSH2 on OpenVMS - Not"
- In reply to: John Smith: "Re: HP to drop hpux?"
- Next in thread: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: HP to drop hpux?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|