Re: Medical software vendor says it won't support OS on Itanium-based servers



In article <op.trf65cq7tte90l@hyrrokkin>,
"Tom Linden" <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 07:57:10 -0700, Bill Gunshannon <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

In article <op.trf4uwkptte90l@hyrrokkin>,
"Tom Linden" <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 06:57:38 -0700, Bill Gunshannon <bill@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

In article <1177666922.680728.246390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Andrew <andrew_harrison@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

My
guess is that Cerner is not interested in putting in the effort to do
this on Itanium.

Knowing the complexity of Cerner's product and taking into
consideration
the dubious future of Itanium (and with it, VMS) can you blame them?
This is one of those things that HP management should have anticipated
and either didn't, or just chose to ignore.

Bill, that isn't all of it. VW and Fiat will likely go to IBM for lack
of
PL/I and that is about 230 systems.

Well, I think it's all part of the same problem. Why is there a lack of
a PL/I compiler? Could it be because there does not appear to be enough
current business or future business to justify the work needed to port
the compiler? Same justification Cerner is probably using for their
decision. And does HP management care enough to do anything about it.
Sorry, rhetorical question.

There is plenty of business, and it doesn't cost HP anything for us to
hook up the compiler to a later version of GEM, other than business acumen.


So then, what was the meaning of your post? Why is it that "VW and Fiat
will likely go to IBM for lack of PL/I"?

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
.