Re: Itanic is sinking

From: joel garry <>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 09:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>

On May 19, 3:42 am, Robert Klemme <> wrote:
> On 19.05.2012 03:28, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 May 2012 14:49:46 -0700, joel garry wrote:
> >> Remember, in the world of Republicans, cutting expenses raises stock
> >> prices and helps the economy through magical Laffing Curves.
> > I don't think that republicans are much to blame for the current HP woes.
> > Neither are democrats. I don't see any connection with politics, at all.
> I think Joel was referring to the exaggerated believe in the market and
> the consequences for mindsets around the globe - especially in financial
> industry.  Raising stock price has become more important than securing
> the future of enterprises far too often.

You got it in one.
> > Meg only applies the same unimaginative therapy
> > as everybody else: layoffs.
> That's what Joel was referring to, I believe.

Yes, exactly. I agree with Mladen's opinion about political discourse here, but sometimes I just can't resist the jab. I do disagree about democrats and republicans having equal blame, but won't go on about it here, except to note Meg Whitman put up $140M of her own dollars to run for governor, failing miserably, in part because of the perception of her heartless and mean treatment of her illegal immigrant housekeeper, which does give some insight into jobs at HP.

> > Well, layoffs will not distinguish HP from their competitors.
> That's a very good point!  Unfortunately it seems to be ignored all too
> often.  Cost cutting by relocating work to countries with lower wages is
> another of those dreadful "best practices".  I think one of the reasons
> is that people are staring too much at numbers of things that can be
> easily measured (wages for example).  Things which do not have a price
> tag easily attached (e.g. additional time spent for home staff,
> communication overhead, cost of misunderstandings etc.) are simply non
> existent for these people.

Actually I think HP management is aware of that, and probably have a realistic strategic view that you have to solve the immediate problem before you can get into a growth mode. It's the tactics that are effed up. I'm sure they are acutely aware what happened to DEC et al, and would love to be a fly on the wall when they are talking about S'noracle.

> > PA RISC was running circles around Intel chips, for a very,
> > very long time. I still remember the shock when I executed "uptime"
> > command on one HP-UX 9 running model 9000 and the answer that came back
> > was "2733 days". GLanceplus was light years ahead of top. OmniBack used
> > to be excellent.

I agree with all that, except I've seen OminBack be a big fail (back in the 8.x days). I also had variable experiences with memory leaks (rman in particular, more recently java and/or oms) that prevented such long uptimes, but can believe what you say for other sites. Can't say I was impressed by Autoraid, even nowadays storage hardware that decides to move stuff around based on recent access history fights with databases.

And of course, pa-risc was so good it led to us being on the Itanic...


-- is bogus.
Received on Mon May 21 2012 - 11:17:55 CDT

Original text of this message