| Title: | DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT. |
| Notice: | Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187 |
| Moderator: | TAEC::BEROUD |
| Created: | Mon Aug 21 1989 |
| Last Modified: | Wed Jun 04 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 6497 |
| Total number of notes: | 27359 |
Can anyone help? I've got one customer who has signed the order for
Lance+ (from LEXCEL a Micro Technology Company) on a Sun and another
considering it. We are trying to pitch DECmcc and I could use some help.
Note #2406 asked for similar help, but was unanswered.
The ad I found in Communications Week May 18, says:
- Manages devices from- "Cisco, ODS, Wellfleet, SynOptics, Cabletron,
Novell and others"
- "Correlate and isolate all alarms"
- "Provides the mapping, data base and reports
- "LANCE+ has an Event Management feature tha can correlate alarms,
trigger remedial applications and log a complete event record for future
analysis"
AND the quote I saw for it was cheap <$5K.
I'd like to talk to anyone with knowledge of the product.
Thanks
Bob Gaul
dtn-336-2143
609-273-2143
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3180.1 | LANCE is tough | SKIBUM::GASSMAN | Wed Jun 17 1992 12:18 | 12 | |
LANCE+ is a very different beast than DECmcc - it looks nice, and is
very 'system engineered' for the LAN/TCP-IP environment. You might
have a chance with MSU, but LANCE seems to beat both MCC and MSU quite
often if it's a customer most interested in LAN management - ie, no
system management, no need for custom work. Customers just seem to
rave about it once they have it - so reference accounts is one the
sales techniques you will come up against. Fight back with references,
tie MCC to the polycenter program and DME future etc - but if the
customer is tatical not strategic in their thinking, you may be in for
an uphill battle.
bill
| |||||
| 3180.2 | MSU should beat out LANCE | PLDMV1::GAUL | Wed Jun 17 1992 13:11 | 14 | |
I received the following comments from Eric Sandovall in Albuquerque.
He said in a TCP/IP-SNMP environment, that LANCE could be tough
competition, but he felt confident that with MSU (NOT DECmcc V1.2) and
a couple near-term (~July-August) future features that we shouldn't lose.
Briefly, MSU should win on functionality, price, ease of use and
broader scope of management capabilities (e.g. DECnet, ELMS and
terminal servers.) MSU's ability to handle and work with private MIBs
and ability to launch applications excels.
LANCE has some good graphics and decent out of the box functionality.
Eric felt that DEC has done TCP/IP customers a disservice by only
talking to them about DECmcc.
| |||||