Conference 7.286::digital

	... of opportunity for your paper - good features, bad features, vital to the
company's revenue flow, needs improvement, etc.

	If you are in or near a field office, contact your Area's Ops manager for some
contacts.

Definately take a look at Stupid Bull S*&t, I mean SBS.  Digital should
show SBS to customers to help to sell services:  "We could do the same
thing for you!"

By the way, if you look into this and find out how the information
generated by SBS is actually used please report back here.  I think this
would be an interesting example of GIGO. 

John

    Marty Sack who is located at MSO2 meets 95% of the criteria you seek
    
    in a person who could help.DTN 223-8590,he is an extremely knowledgable
    
    and helpful individual.

    mmmm
    think he will be after his name has been broadcast?
    
    
    			:-)
    

     	 I'm a little reluctant to admit this, for fear of backlash 
     notsefile ratholers:  (please limit criticism to vaxmail, keep it 
     out of notesfile.)  Hey we're a service organization and without 
     you, we'd be out of jobs and we realize that.
     
     I am a system manager in BXB/LTN.  Might I be able to provide some 
     information? I've been in such an organization as this for several 
     years now.  I work in a team that supports t/s production and test 
     clusters used by fellow DECies to get their jobs done on a daily 
     basis. 
     
     RE: .3  I believe that everything we use for production of our 
     internal processing needs is on DEC equipment, including third 
     party products like Tandy PC's with a DIGITAL stamp on the front.  
     If you are referring to the possibility of IBM mainframes running 
     payroll or general ledger somewhere in the bowels of an unobtrusive 
     building in Maynard, my guess is no.  Its done on VAXs now and has 
     been for several years.
     
     
     
     Bryan

	Some of our telecom stuff is UNIX, we have applications written in 
	LOTUS 1-2-3, I am sure we have non-dec PC's - and we still have some 
	PDP'S!!!!!!!!

	I'm not sure of the Modems and PABX's, but I thought quite a lot of
	stuff in the network box space wasn't ours.

	Heather

My only comment is

   "They're not bad enough to get replaced, 
    they're not good enough to help us compete 
    succesfully."
    
Dick

  Re: .6     
  >> If you are referring to the possibility of IBM mainframes running 
  >> payroll or general ledger somewhere in the bowels of an unobtrusive 
  >> building in Maynard, my guess is no.  Its done on VAXs now and has 
  >> been for several years.

  SEVERAL YEARS???  I thought it was around 1970 that the old Burroughs
  system in the Mill was retired.  Someone out there must know, but it
  was a lot more that a few (several) years ago.  Many I/S systems ran
  on the DECSystem-10 and some early applications (later replaced or con-
  verted to VMS) date back to the days of Digital's PDP-6 and PDP-11/70.
     
  Re: .7     
  >>	Some of our telecom stuff is UNIX, we have applications written in 
  >>	LOTUS 1-2-3, I am sure we have non-dec PC's - and we still have some 
  >>	PDP'S!!!!!!!!

  BTW, PDP's were/are DEC products.

  Re: .8  -< Internal systems will be the death of us! >-
  >> "They're not bad enough to get replaced, 
  >>  they're not good enough to help us compete 
  >>  succesfully."
    
  They may not be perfect; there may be a lot of things wrong with them;
  but considering the complexity of the business rules that they support,
  our internal information systems generally get the job done, mainly
  on Digital hardware, and increasingly with Digital-only software.

  For anyone listening, do you think it would be possible to have a 
  'rational' discussion of what's wrong with our information systems,
  why they cost so much to build and maintain, and how they could be
  improved, via the Notes conference?

  Chuck

RE:            <<< Note 1744.9 by FDCV09::CONLEY "Chuck Conley, ACO" >>>

>  For anyone listening, do you think it would be possible to have a 
>  'rational' discussion of what's wrong with our information systems,
>  why they cost so much to build and maintain, and how they could be
>  improved, via the Notes conference?

I'd say that our information systems are the way they are because they
are not a high priority item in the corporation.  Not to mention that
outside of Engineering, Digital's ability to develop quality software
systems is practically nil.  If manure level of our software products
continues to rise at its present rate that exception will soon be gone
as well. 

            <<< Note 1744.9 by FDCV09::CONLEY "Chuck Conley, ACO" >>>
     
  Re: .7     
  >>	Some of our telecom stuff is UNIX, we have applications written in 
  >>	LOTUS 1-2-3, I am sure we have non-dec PC's - and we still have some 
  >>	PDP'S!!!!!!!!

>  BTW, PDP's were/are DEC products.

	I was replying to a comment that said all our stuff was run on VAXs.

	I know PDP's are Digitals, I also know they are not VAXs

	Heather

> I know PDP's are Digitals, I also know they are not VAXs

Ah, yes, but VAXen used to be PDP-11s.  The first VAX was known as the 
PDP-11/780 to give the new computer some of the luster of the PDP-11, one 
of the most successful computers of all time, indeed one of the most successful 
commercial products of all time, right up there with the DC-3 in my book.

			

From .12:

> the PDP-11, one 
> of the most successful computers of all time, indeed one of the most successful 
> commercial products of all time, right up there with the DC-3 in my book.

I think of the PDP-11 more as a 707. Now, the PDP-8, another very successful
machine, is like the DC-3. (Perhaps I think of it that way because the
PDP-8e I have in my basement sounds like a DC-3 when I turn it on, and those
big fans spin up.)

(BTW - the PDP-8 I have is still on a property pass. Nobody I know knows how
to just give it to me. It probably cost more to renew the property passes (when
they had to be renewed) than the machine is worth.)

Steve Kovner

Memory fades as the neurons go, but I remember PDP-11/780 before VAX-11/780.

I am actually quite young.  Perhaps some old-timer can sort this out.

    	I seem to remember the VAX 11/780 as meaning,

    	   Virtual Address eXtension of the PDP11  

    There was never a product called the PDP-11/780. The first VAX
    processor was the VAX-11/780.

    Reminds me of a conversation I heard between a couple of teenagers
    in a convenience store a while back: "Bobby Kennedy - wasn't he
    President once?"

    (Sorry...)

    VAX means Virtual Address eXtension, and the "11" designation
    indicated the presence of compatibility mode.

There may never have been a product called the PDP 11/780, but
that doesn't mean there never was one...

    
    It was probably a slip refering to the PDP-11/70.  That was
    the one they had to stop making for some kind of environmental
    or safety issue.  Perhaps OSHA was in on that.  I've forgotten
    the details actually.
    
    Steve
    

	RE: .19 We stopped making the PDP 11/70 because of the requirements
	around electromagnetic interference. I seem to remember the VAX
	being called a PDP-11/780 internally before product announcement.
	But that was a long time ago so I'm not sure.

			Alfred

    I think the VAX-11/780 was formerly known as the PDP-11/500.
        John Sauter

re               <<< Note 1744.21 by SAUTER::SAUTER "John Sauter" >>>
>                               -< /500, I think >-

>    I think the VAX-11/780 was formerly known as the PDP-11/500.

	NO !   11/85 or "Unicorn", but NOT PDP-11/500.

>        John Sauter

	Reg	{was there}

    Thanks to all of you who wrote in and offered information.
    
    I'm down to the wire now; there was a two week extension on the paper,
    but work's had me so busy, I've barely been able to get going on it
    (not to mention a tendency to procrastinate, and a recent addiction to
    Soapbox...)
    
    I've posted a second note - 1776 or so, asking for specific information
    about the SPOC Inquiry tool which includes the QVL. If you're familiar
    with the tool and have a minute, PLEASE voice your opinion of SPOC,
    what it does well, what it does poorly, what you think could be
    changed, fixed or improved. Please also include why you use SPOC, and
    how long you've been using the system. I haven't used it since 1990,
    and I hear its improved.
                                   

BTW-

Do any of the information you have gathered cover applications used in
the field? There are a myriad of them in the Sales & Services
organization.

Lee Roth (former CHAMP/SMART jockey)