Conference 7.286::digital

    back in the early 80's the writers of the PC rags were telling us that
    within a few years everyone (and they meant everyone) was going have a
    PC and they would be doing all kinds of wonderful things on them. 
    Those same writers thought the PC was going to be the savior of
    mankind.  Well, a decade later and you know what, PC's still have a
    long way to go.  About 1/3 of the people that have PC's don't even use
    them anymore, and about 4/5 of the rest use them for a few
    applications.  The hackers and whiz kids use them the most and think
    everyone else does the same.


    now with imaging coming along it's interesting that PC's are slowing
    down the integration of document imagining into most corporations, and
    a few that I know of have decided that they won't implement imaging on
    PC's cause it cost to much in terms of upgrading the PC so it can do
    imaging.  

    So i wonder what the PC writers will be saying in another decade.  Will
    they be telling us that this time its for real, PC's really are the
    savior of mankind and will take over the world and no one will make any
    money with anything else.

    Come to think of it, about the only people making money on PC's now are
    Taiwan etc. and those offering consulting to make the darn things do
    some simple work.  oh, and people who service them, they are making a
    bundle.  But the SW firms still haven't figured out how to stop the
    people from using SW without paying for it and the flea markets make
    sure no one makes any money selling the HW.  Oh yea, and the PC rags,
    they have been making money too, although given their track record on
    analyzing the industry i wonder why.

    The last thing in the world Digital needs is arrogance.
    
    The last thing the world needs from Digital is advice.
    
    Let's just shut up for once and develop, manufacture, and sell
    products.

    the last thing the world (our consumers) want is advice from Digital.
    they may need it, but they'd never pay us for it.
    
    and is also true that PC Weak writers giving advice is like tv sports
    casters telling a football coach what he should do.

    
    re: .3
    
    Just curious, what do you do at Digital?  If you don't mind my asking.
    

    I'm a quote manager, custom image quotes for the Services EIC.  right
    now doing mostly Plexus quotes.

    
    
    "    within a few years everyone (and they meant everyone) was going have a
    PC and they would be doing all kinds of wonderful things on them. "
    
    
    There are 100 million DOS licenses sold. 
    EVERYONE DOES HAVE ONE! 
    
    Ever use EXCEL? It is wonderful! Ever use Quicken? It is wonderful!
    And Quicken cost $50. WONDERFUL!!
    
    4/5 of them only use it for one application? So WHAT! That's what they
    need. No one wants a computer you know. They want what the computer
    does. Big difference. 
    
    ALLEN_R: I suggest you find out, on your own, what percentage of the
    HW computer market belongs to PCs, in terms of revenue. Then find
    the same for SW. You will find out that PC world, rather you like
    it or not, IS THE COMPUTER INDUSTRY right now. 	

    ref .-1
    I agree, what KO said in his last talk here in ZKO is similar to
    what you say, people look and see they get same power in small
    PC as some of our big computers, and that all what they care for
    is an applications that does what they want, most people don't
    buy the hardware or the operating systems, they buy the applications,
    and the OS and the hardware comes with it.

    /Nasser
    I spell checked

    >EVERYONE DOES HAVE ONE! 
    
    i don't, neighbor across street doesn't, neighbors on each side don't,
    neighbor up the street (another DECie btw) doesn't.  Heck, I even have
    a friend the sells them that doesn't.  He's like me, can't find a
    valid use for one at home.  And my mother doesn't, nor my father, nor
    75% of my relatives.  get the picture.

    The personal computer, either in its IBM-compatible or Macintosh form,
    is, after the telephone, the most common business tool.
    
    Digital is not only regarded by the business press of the 80's, but by
    people writing business history books that will be read for the next
    fifty years as committing the largest business blunder of the 1980's in
    missing the trend to personal computers and open systems.
    
    It's time to stop defending poor decisions of the past and to move on.

    re: .8
    
    Quick, get a sales/marketing team into this geography!

    i'm not defending decisions made in the past if you're refering to me. 
    nor am i convinced that rag writers know what the future is.  nor do i
    think the historians are ready to write their analysis.  
    
    
    

    
    Before the point becomes buried, note that ALLEN_R mentioned 
    that the customers referenced were doing imaging applications.
    
    We have a group that is trying to be a force in this market.
    
    PC's are NOT a very good platform for this application, but
    an EISA Alpha PC could own the market.  Sounds like an 
    opportunity, to me.  Also, the Alpha version of the Vaxstation
    4000-VLC would be an excellent entry-level networked imaging
    platform.
    
    There's lot's of PC's, true.  But they are not the best choice
    for every application/market.  Example, the virtual dominance 
    of Commodore Amiga-based Video Toaster in the video production
    market, allowing small video houses to compete with the "big"
    guys.

    Many non-computer people use PCs at work and at home.  I teach Digital
    customers how to use our database products, and I occasionally go to a
    customer site to teach.  I do not see banks of character cell VT (or
    other) terminals; I see Apple Macintoshes or IBM/IBM clone PCs. 
    Programmers may have workstations.  At home, I have a Macintosh LC.  I
    use it to dial up, and I use it for word processing/desktop publishing
    (MacWrite II), finance (Quicken), and customizing greeting cards and
    signs (Print Shop).  My five-year old daughter has no problem using the
    machine, once I boot it up for her.  She clicks the mouse on the pink
    GAMES folder (she picked the color), then clicks on the game she wants
    to play.  Her favorites are Kid Pix (drawing), Reader Rabbit (reading
    readiness), and Playroom (simple typing, telling time, making
    pictures).
    
    I used to have a Rainbow (bought it in 1984).  My 75 year old aunt has
    it now.  She uses it for word processing, to keep track of her cooking
    recipes, and to write letters to her friends.
    
    It is very likely that I will be going to DECUS in the fall, to give a
    presentation on DATATRIEVE (even this 1970s product has a windows
    interface.  I will probably use Power Point (on my Apple or one in the
    Learning Center) to put it together.
    
    Regards,
    Bruce

    interestingly enough some are saying that imaging will be a boom in the
    next few years that will make the PC market look like small fry. 
    Companies are just now starting to think about it and are spending a
    few million on pilots.  the total cost to corporations for imaging will
    be in the 10's of millions and will use compute power like never
    before.  I'd estimate that DEC should be getting between 5-10 billion
    from imaging in 5-7 years if it can ever decide to get into the
    business.  one can hope they will, and Alpha will sure make it easier.

    trouble a lot of companies are having now is they have these pc
    albatrosses on the desk and want to try to find a way to shoehorn them
    into the image system.  but that is good news too cause it takes a lot
    of SW, HW, and service to do it and if we stop giving that away we can 
    start making some real money.

    re .-1
    
    since we've digressed anyway so, to ensure that Alpha ws are in a
    position for doing imaging work we'll need to get high-res monitors
    (120/150 dpi) and video cards for them. Anything going on in this
    direction?

RE: 2054.1

>    now with imaging coming along it's interesting that PC's are slowing
>    down the integration of document imagining into most corporations, and
>    a few that I know of have decided that they won't implement imaging on
>    PC's cause it cost to much in terms of upgrading the PC so it can do
>    imaging.  


    It's curious that the author of the 2054.1 used document management to
    illustrate the alleged lack of PC functionality.  Digital offers a
    product that brings document management with excellent performance to
    any desktop with a VGA and 486-based PC or a MAC on it.  (386-based
    PCs supported, but with lower performance.)

    DECedms is sold and is successful in the engineering space. However, its
    functionality is applicable to many document management environments. 
    DECedms is based on a client-server architecture with a VMS system 
    as file and database server and VAXstations, PCs or MACs as clients.

    Two months ago I attended the AIIM show where I saw what seemed like
    hundreds of PC-based DECedms competitors.

    Julian

                           

	I think it's hysterical that ALLEN_R thinks PCs are

	a) Not a major force in the market	
	b) unused by anyone
	c) and "albatrosses"

	Like most of DEC engineering, my guess is that ALLEN_R has
	not poked his head out of the Mill ( or wherever ) in about
	5 years.  

	But, if folks like him continue to make decisions
	about DEC's future directions, we can all plan on working
	somewhere else.  Did you know that Microsoft is hiring ?

	Steve H

	P.S.  Owner of two 486-33s, Ethernet network, 30 or so
	MS-DOS applications, etc.

I believe that most people do *not* have a PC at home.  Most people don't have
a photocopier at home either, or a VAX for that matter.  PCs are primarily
a business tool.  We're in business to sell to business, so the consumer
market is pretty much irrelevant to DEC.  BTW, I don't have a PC at home
(or a VCR, TV, or microwave).

RE: .18 et al

Gerald is right, PC's have a huge market in small businesses. I have
two neighbors who own businesses and run them using PC's.  If you are
looking to start a small business, you will go for the small capital
expense of a PC.  My father (74 years old) even bought one for his
woodworking shop.

BUT and this is a BIG but, my wife works for a national company that
moved from a downtown office building to the 'burgs and left their 
mainframe behind.  They do all of their work on a PC client/server 
setup.  It is this type of change that will be the major problem for
Digital to overcome.  Novell and Norton and others have captured this
software/network market.  This is where the risk of losing the business
is most obvious.

I believe that Digital has the ability to penetrate that market if
Alpha and NT support are on time.  But if we slip up this time, there
will be no second chance.  As another note states, we missed the PC
revolution.  We can not afford to miss the next one.

Lee G.

P.S. For a long time, I did not/could not justify buying a PC since I
had a terminal and a modem at home to connect me to a "real" computer.
However, in June we bought one because my wife wanted to work at home.
Believe me, there are programs running on it that are every bit as good
as the ones that run on a VAX.  And the cost is must less for both the 
hardware and the software.

    Had I had the knowledge and confidence, it is likely that I would have
    sounded much like ALLEN_R up to a year or so ago.  I've worked in SW
    Engineering for 10's and 20's, and in the field consulting on VMS,
    CASE, and Rdb.  I thought we had the best products, the greatest SW (if
    not the greatest HW).  Then I bought a PC.
        I've described it as having thought VMS was my whole world, *the*
    whole world, and then opening a door...and finding I was in a
    submarine, and the world rushed in and overwhelmed me.  More SW,
    *better* SW (by non-techie standards), than I had seen on VMS.

    Now I will grant ALLEN_R's statement on the scarceness of PCs in his
    non-business world.  It is possible that his neighborhood has few PCs
    (mentioning a fellow DECie, however, is no argument--that's like saying
    that a vegetarian friend does not raise pigs for food).  In my corner
    of the world (near Philadelphia), things may be different.  Many of my
    friends own PCs, but I discount the bulk of them: they are, like me,
    professional programmers (but they are my friends, curiously, by
    geography: we all go to the same church and live in the same
    neighborhood).  But the carpenters and contractors in my church are
    buying PCs, or investigating it.  A friend who is hoping to move out of
    Human Services and into something that pays the bills bought a clone;
    another bought one to "help" with his change of career from insurance
    to Occupational Therapy (he has many papers to write in the next few
    years); another friend sought one to learn "secretarial skills"
    (WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3) as a fallback during unemployment.  And
    *none* of these people can afford it as a toy, a luxury.

    At the same time that I saw all these non-business users, I began to
    notice (and this time without--or, I hope, with less--arrogance) how
    many of my customers use PCs (and Macs, which I'll include), for real
    work.

    
    Not to single out anyone.....can't we just admit DEC missed the 
    PC boat ; grab a life preserver and swim toward that boat ASAP.
    And once on board, do the best we can?  If we find we are losing 
    our shirts, just say no....and graciously exit the PC scene?
    
    Sounds too simple...}-)
    
    
    BTW....I am a secretary, not making a king's ransom at DEC but felt
    it was important enough to buy my own 2000+. PC and now that I have 
    had it for a year, I sold it and am looking into buying a more power-
    ful one.  As good as DEC products are (for a time I had a DEC system
    running side by side my PC) there was a whole new world possible with
    the PC.  This doesn't mean that the "typical" DEC products aren't good
    it just means they a different.  In the PC vein, has anyone heard about
    the "Tiger" and when it is supposed to be available?
    
    

	The answer to your first paragraph is in your last paragraph.

	Digital simply can't afford to not be a force in the PC world.
	That's where more and more of the money is.

					Tom_K

    >EVERYONE DOES HAVE ONE! 
    
>    i don't, neighbor across street doesn't, neighbors on each side don't,
>    neighbor up the street (another DECie btw) doesn't.  Heck, I even have
>    a friend the sells them that doesn't.  He's like me, can't find a
>    valid use for one at home.  And my mother doesn't, nor my father, nor
>    75% of my relatives.  get the picture.


They certainly don't have a VAX. 

In any case, what machine is sitting on their desktop at WORK.  (a "niche" market).

Think of McDonalds.

	Bob Cohen 

>   trouble a lot of companies are having now is they have these pc
>    albatrosses on the desk and want to try to find a way to shoehorn them
>    into the image system.  

 
 When they find the need to upgrade they will most likely just buy more powerful
 PC systems.  If we're LUCKY, they'll be ALPHA based.  If not, another chip will
 do fine, I'm sure...

 	Bob Cohen

    IMO, DEC has taken a good step with EPP support.  Granted, there is a
    lot of bellyaching about EPP.  But, for someone like me it is what is
    allowing PC expertise to rise at DEC.  I'm getting a good system and
    DEC is helping me with financing.  I'm not the only one in my group
    that is doing this.  In addition to getting up to speed on VMS and
    Ultrix, my group is also getting up to speed on DOS.  For all of us,
    the DOS portion is being done at our own personal expense, but it's
    nice that DEC is showing willingness to help out.
    
    Our future isn't in doing DOS or Ultrix or VMS.  Our future is in doing
    DOS and Ultrix and VMS.
    
    Steve

	  Hello,


	  A few figures from Dataquest and other sources:

	  o  Estimated total worldwide system sales in 1991: $110B

	  o  Estimated total worldwide PC sales 1991: $48B

	  o  Estimated PC shipments in 1992: 26M

	  o  Estimate of Microsoft's installed PC user base: 80M

	  o  Estimate of Microsoft Windows user: 16M

	  o  Estimated number of PC applications: 40K


	  Let's get real. The PC is the single most powerful
	  force in the computing business today. And it will be
	  for a long time to come.

	  Cheers,
	  

		Mike.
	  

    
    	The mavens of the auto industry used to look around the Detroit
    suburbs and say:
    
    	Foreign cars, I don't see no stinkin' foreign cars
    
    JN

    
    RE: .26
    
    Thank you for posting these. 
    
    Everyone in Digital engineering should be forced to memorize them. 
    
    The PC world is HALF of the computer industry. It also has the largest
    growth rate. 
    

RE: .27

I think that is what our left coast employees have been trying to tell
GMA for a long time!  Even before I joined Digital, I could see that the
PC was not going away as a competitor.  Interesting isn't it, Detroit was
saying "look at those little things, they are toys!" just before the sky
fell in on them.

Lee G.

    
    I became convinced some time back that applications are what sell, not
    exotic hardware or name brand.  After spending a lot of money on a
    Commodore Amiga (a very advanced architecture by PC standards), only to
    see an almost complete lact of professional grade productivity
    software, I switched to a PC running MS-Windows.
    
    I actually _hate_ using DECWrite and DECDecision now that I have Word
    and Excel on my home machine.  Our own DECWindows applications can't
    even share clipboard data (try cutting a cell from DECDecision Calc and
    pasting it into DECWrite, or any other app for that matter).  I'll
    grant you that MS-DOS, as an operating system, is so primitive as to be
    comical compared to VMS.  However, the whole DOS/Windows package simple
    works better for me than our Workstation based tools.
    
    In fact, the only reason I even use a Workstation anymore is to run
    UniGraphics, a super-powered Mechanical CAD tool.  And with eXcursions,
    I could in fact pitch my Workstation and do everything on a PC, using
    the Vax as a UniGraphics server.  If only I could squeeze enough money
    out of my boss for a nice 433w system...
    
    Ed
                                                      

Having been around the "personal computer" industry since '75 (back when they
were still called "microcomputers"), I've been amused and disgusted with what
I've read in PC related magazines.  Over the years, I've read:

	- Hard disks are a bad idea whose time has passed
	- Multitasking is just "big computer think" and has no place on the
	  desktop
	- No one's ever going to want anything better than Visicalc and DBase 
		III
	- IBM PCs are as good as it gets

Ok, so we've seen most of those statements go down in flames (with MACs being
arguably as useful (or more) than PCs, thus disproving the last statement).
The point being that we've all seen a lot of BS printed in PC journals.

In the same period of time, I've seen PCs do a whole lot.  I can now think of
three desktop systems that I'd rather have on my desk (at home) than a VAX,
and it's all mainly because they're just not as cantankerous to use.  Of the
VAXstations I've had (3000 series, for the most part), I can say that 
VAXstations running VMS:

	- Boot slowly
	- Take forever to login (particularly using DECwindows)
	- Have poor windows/mouse/redraw response
	- Don't multitask that smoothly
	- Require more "system management" expertise
	- Need more memory
	- Need more hard disk space
	- Are harder to install

... than any of those other three desktop systems that I'm thinking of.  By
comparison, the VAXen do seem to be a more stable platform, and offer a greater
overall set of features.

Even still, the latest PeeCee software I've seen does GUI things that DEC can't
get near.  And, since they can do more with less memory and disk, they generally
cost a bunch less.  Overall, I'd probably prefer one of those other three 
desktop systems to a VAXstation at work as well, were it not for the fact that
I use my VAXstation to compile VAX code.

So, I've read a bunch of garbage in PeeCee rags, and the thought that a 16M
Alpha system would be useful is one more example.  (That is, if they're talking
about running VMS on it, which I'll bet will take considerably more than 16M.)
It's just that none of it, and none of the other obvious buffoonery that I've
seen in the PeeCee world (which insists on making all the same mistakes as the
"big computer world, only 20 years later) has prevented the PeeCee world from
being a major force in the computer industry.  Perhaps THE major force.

Ok, so I screwed up.  I was so busy nitpicking on techie merits, and totally
missed the big picture.  Sure, if I wanted to tinker around under the hood of
some system, I'd probably prefer a VAX to anything else I can think of.  But,
if I'm trying to get something useful done (other than a job that requires
underhood tinkering), maybe the VAX ain't such a good choice.

So, now that DEC has totally missed this market, we have two choices:

1) Stand up, brush off, and say in our best PeeWee Herman voices "I meant to do
that", and go on to make our new, smaller Digital just as successful as the
older, bigger one was at the end of FY92, or

2) Stand up, say "Oops", and start working on selling to the major piece of the
market.

In that respect, I have to agree with the tone of the article in .0:  We 
(Digital) screwed up, and we ought to unscrew ourselves rather than just making
more excuses.

    
    I suggest anyone interested in the raw numbers from DATAQUEST check
    out:
    
    		NODEMO::MARKETING    note 1947.*
    
    
    	Press K7 to add to your notebook.

    
    Before we go too far off the deep end with automobile parable,  I'd 
    ask you all to remember that the "Japanese Econobox" threat has been 
    replaced by the Lexus, Acura and Infiniti making life miserable for
    Cadillac, BMW, Mercedes etc.
    
    If the PC/Workstation is the Econobox, the Minicomputer/Server is 
    the Luxury car. 
    
    Question:
    
    Most companies have different subsidiaries for their Economy and Luxury
    car lines.  Should Digital have seperate divisions for low-end and 
    high-end systems?
    
    Just a thought...
    
    -Ed
    

   I read that article (excepted in .0) and basically agreed with it.

   I had one good thing to say out of it: at least they're bothering to
talk about us.  Very few people bother to benchmark our systems any more
in the popular rags which aren't devoted to Digital products: they're just
not cost-effective.  I believe the last one I saw was benchmarking database
performance.  We came in near the bottom against a slew of PC-based servers,
and when the cost was factored in, we were either dead last or next to there.
(It was an SQL server benchmark with a VAX based server running ORACLE.)

   My roommate manages a PC network for the corp. MIS department at GTE and
he's tossing his VAX.  Our sales people don't call back, don't deliver
stuff on time, and for the cost of our maintenance contract, he can purchase
one or two new '486-based servers with 1gb disks each year.  If they break,
he can go to a local computer-mart for replacement parts.  Maintaining a
PC is a common-knowledge skill.

   We've got to wise up if we're interested in the mass market.

					-mjg

    I hope we (Digital) are looking beyond the PC now anyway, take a look
    at recent reviews of the Apple Newton due out next January. 
    Expected to cost between $500 and $700 it'll recognise you written
    input, drawings etc, be an organiser, FAX things for you etc etc...
    
    It looks like the first crossing of the line from gimmik to tool that your
    'average person' in the street will buy.
    
    -Dom

Re: Serveral notes ago

Anyone heard of "Tiger"?

Tiger and Tiger II are internal code names for a new family
of PC's that Digital is manufacturing to sell through 
1-800-PCBYDEC.  Look for more info regarding these products in the
next 3-6 weeks.

Craig

    Tiger is, by itself, unimportant.  Any bunny can build a PC these days. 
    What is important, and where we are seriously behind the eight ball, is
    software.  The next generation Pathworks has been radically slashed
    because of budget problems with PCSG.  Our layered applications such as
    DEC Mailworks, Teamlinks, etc., don't even look like they came from the
    same company.  With rare exceptions like eXcursion they don't rate
    favourably against the opposition.  And more and more DEC is paying
    money that should be retaining inhouse expertise to outside software
    houses, and this only increases our support problems.
    
    Maybe, and only *maybe*, now that KO is gone our PC groups have a
    chance.  Time will tell if Palmer is more sympathetic.  But even so,
    the garbage look-at-each-quarter's-results attitude is seriously
    hurting long-term projects (like HYDRA) which are essential to our
    success.

    
    What's a HYDRA?
    
    -Ed
    

A multiprocessor VAX project which was killed in the early '80s; why?

    
    Digital: "bring out your dead!"
    
    HYDRA: "I'm not dead yet!"
    
    Digital: "Yes you are!"
    
    -Ed
    

    Re: .40 or so
    
    HYDRA was a multiprocessor PDP-11 project that was killed in the late
    1970s.
    
    Andromeda was the VAX multiprocessor built in the early 1980s.

    
    
    	A proto was built... It was till running in the BXB lab when 
    	we still lived in BXB.
    
        It lived on for awhile as an A/D project...
    
    	The project was killed back around the 86-87 time frame...
    
    						Mike
    						----

    
    .32 and .35 seem to highlight an area we may need to improve. During
    the 80's we (digital) may have been too close to the "technology" of
    the computer and electronics industry. We seemed to focus on adding
    bells and whistles, and possibly applying more "technology", and
    subsequent cost, than was needed. Customers began to notice the cost
    curves and solution costs, PC's became a viable alternative. We
    missed the boat several times on that pier. Hopefully alpha and strong
    solutions will allow us to reverse the tide.
    
    			fred deady
    			wbc::deady

    Is there a significant computer-related market left where large
    manufacturers lead and users follow?
    
    Only a tiny fraction of the employees of Digital need to be dedicated
    to Alpha.  The rest of us ought to be more in touch with how people and
    organizations use computers, whatever they do, and help then do it
    better.
    
    Helping customers by living in their armpit rather than coasting on the
    momentum of the installed base is "evolution in action".

    
    	Re: .last several
    
    	No, Hydra was definitely (unless, of course, "hydra" was used more
    than once...) a multiprocessor VAX/VMS system.  (I believe the design
    base was a quad-780 configuration.)  Part of that project has still
    survived to this day: the failure identification part became a separate
    product, VAXsim, after the overall Hydra was canned.  I was one of the
    VAXsim developers.  This was the early 80s.
    
    	Andromeda was also a multiprocessor VAX system, but was an
    up-to-32-microVAX configuration that ended up as a parallel programming
    AD effort.  This was in the late 80s (1987-88 timeframe, if I recall
    correctly) and was done in the same group that I as doing parallelism
    work in.
    
    							-craig

re: .18,

> I believe that most people do *not* have a PC at home.  Most people don't have
> a photocopier at home either, or a VAX for that matter.  PCs are primarily
> a business tool.  We're in business to sell to business, so the consumer
> market is pretty much irrelevant to DEC.  BTW, I don't have a PC at home
> (or a VCR, TV, or microwave).

	I don't own any of those things and none of my neighbors do either!
    Of course, we all live in caves and eat raw meat for dinner, but so what?
    Fire - now that's what the consumer really needs - none of this PC stuff!

	Seriously, let's face it - DEC missed the PC boat.  Actually, we didn't
    really miss it as much as we simply boarded a similar looking fleet of boats
    which all turned out to have slow leaks (DECmate, Rainbow, Professional),
    and the survivors of our little excursion have since had to swim back to
    shore to build a better boat.  With Alpha, we may just have the means for
    building a better boat.  What we really need to do however is to leapfrog
    the oceanic transportation technology metaphor altogether and revolutionize
    the industry by inventing the next mode of transportation.  With Palmer, we
    may just be able to do that as well.

				     -davo

re: .40

The multiprocessor PDP-11 project in the seventies was done at
Carnegie-Mellon University.  The processor was C.mmp; the operating
system was Hydra.  I don't know how much of the funding, if any, came from DEC.

I don't know if there was any connection between the CMU Hydra project
and the subsequent DEC Hydra project, described in other notes.

   Gary

    
    	Can you tell me if this lesson in mythology will help the dinosaur
    evolve?
    
    	One revolutionary point will be reached when we start responding to
    the substance of the notes entered here, rather than pointing out
    trivial errors that have no bearing on the discussion (the "hey, Joe,
    you spelled 'aqua' wrong!" replies).  Unfortunately I think it's a
    culture thing - I see the same thing happening in meetings.
    
    	So let's get on with it - we can define the new company here or
    just follow Wang.  What'll it be?
    
    JN

    It's not the most important thing to count what percentage of the
    people have PCs at home. We should rather count what share of the
    home equipment belongs to what group and I bet that PCs dominate
    there heavily (except perhaps in France, where you can get a Minitel
    terminal free from the PTT).
    
    Equally, we should look what is the existing end user equipment
    selection at the customer site, what is the preferred type in
    near future (price/functionality taken into account) and do our
    solutions based on that. In some cases it's sufficient to make
    applications fit to be used with one equipment type only when
    there is no need for everybody to use the application. For the
    applications, which are used by most of the people, the support
    should cover a reasonable choice of end user equipment.
    
    I know, this is not anything new, but amasingly often forgotten.
    Or we do one piece in here, another piece in there and then things
    do not fit together. The result is that we can sell a solution for
    a PC/DOS user of a PC/WINDOWS user or a Workstation user or a VT
    user, but not for the selection of them. Or we could sell a solution
    based on VMS when user wants UNIX or.....
    
    We seem to have plenty of good products, but sometimes obviously too
    many visions of what should be the end result.
    
    --Ritva
    

    re-.1
    
     Where can we get more information about HYDRA? I suppose PWDOS the
    current PCSA notes conference does not discuss futures??
    
    -Mike Z.
    
     I spelt checked. TM

    
    Folks,
    
    Please keep in mind that discussion of future unannounced Digital products 
    is not appropriate for this notes conference.
    
    Thanks,
    
    -Joe
    co-Moderator Digital
    

           <<< Note 2054.52 by NEWVAX::MZARUDZKI "I am my own VAX" >>>

    >I spelt checked. TM
                      ^^^

    WHAT , WHAT !!!
    
    I cant believe my own eyes!

    Dear Mike Z,

    I therefor hereby and henceforth must inform you that a a breach of a 
    copyrighted materials has been presented hence by .

    I for there have consulted and called upon and instructed my highly
    esteemed associates of the law offices of "jolly,molly,didly and sons" to 
    arrange an immediate gathering with your's for the purpose to resolve 
    this impending matter critical conflict .

    I look forward to working with you on this in the form of equitable sums.
    in retrospective
    /Nasser
                     "TM" , member NYSE
    I spelled checked 

Re: .52 & anyone else

Information about the PATHWORKS related "Hydra" would have to come through 
the PATHWORKS product management (start with RANGER::PWDOS4, topic 4).

...petri

    re .52 (and others)
    
    Well, since my totally innocuous explanation of Hydra which said
    absolutely nothing that you can't find in other conferences has been
    deleted by the moderators, let me just say that the simplest way to
    find out about it ask your local PCI Partner or PCSA PID person.  The
    architecture hasn't changed even though the details (about which I said
    NOTHING) are changing all the time thanks to Digital's current crisis
    of lack of leadership and vision.
    
    You can also get a fairly good overview of where Pathworks is heading
    (or supposed to head, management and budgets willing) in the NON-PID
    Pathworks strategy presentation.  

    
     Well just trying to figure out our office/pc strategy is becoming a
    full time job. Heck we cannot even market a product without changing
    the name x number of times. Now we talk of value added to our PC
    products. The last time I checked, a couple of bucks value added is
    NOT going to make much money if you only sell a couple of thousand
    shrinked wrapped products. And BTW the other guys bundle it in for
    free.
    
     Look at the tone of these replys and you will see "Ego" and
    "arrogance" which is what the article was talking about. Who was it
    that said something like my neighboors don't have pcs etc etc. HAH
    I say again HAH! They don't have VAXen either. And when they buy their
    kids a game system, what do you think that is. It ain't a VAX.
    
     At least the third time or is it fourth time in this market we are
    making a rabid improvement. Rapib sounds better than rapid. But
    we need CLEAR product strategys, mass marketing, cheap machines
    and better this and that. Sigh, I degress.
    
    Nasser, further consultation is needed.
    I Spelt checked. TM
    verses
    "I spelled checked " TM the differences are obvious. What country is
    your trade mark filed in?
    
    Mike Z. :^)

    
    I would invite anyone who's no believer of Low-end PC and WINDOWs
    user to visit WINDOW & OS/2 conference today at World Trade Center
    in Boston.
    
    I bet you will change your mind after the overwhelming and high
    impact exhibition on the floors. 
    
    For all engineers and marketeers, we shall watch out what's customers
    want and what's coming out there. Don't ever live on our sand and dream
    of 80's anymore.
    
    Michael.. ( Waiting my Portable arriving)
    

Anyone who thinks PC's can't cut it in the imaging space apparently did not
attend the recent AIIM Show in June (AIIM is the largest Imaging trade show and
conference around). Out of approximately 360 vendors displaying their product on
the floor, 358 were using PC's running MS-Windows as the desktop device of choice.
Out here in the field, every single imaging proposal I have worked on over the
last 2 years has specifically stated that DOS PC's ARE THE DESKTOP DEVICE! We 
have constantly had to go with 3rd party offerings as DEC did not have a 
solution with PC's as the desktop. (That is changing, but it has been a long time
coming).

Re: back a few

You and your neighbours may not have PCs or VAXen. However, a certain company
mentioned in "The Economist" probably has a presense: Nintendo. Sales per
employee of $4.7Million last year. Now, if that were Digital,....

May the next wave be Alpha based, enterprise independant, person to person
Digital communication. Then Notes for Alpha/PDAs, TeamRoute for Alpha/PDAs,
etc, etc earn the cash...
								- Ian W.

    First, I can't belive that the Pathworks and related product budgets
    have been cut.  If anything, they should be increased.  Pathworks is,
    IMO, one of the best networking products around.  Version 4.1 shows
    that the developers know a lot about MS-DOS, Windows and networking
    internals in general.  I would hate having to install and support PC
    networking products from ***, ***, or *-* (fill in the appropriate
    letters :).
    
    We should be concentrating more software dollars on developing
    world-class PC applications.  I would include software development
    tools/compilers (VAXset, DECdesign, the GEM compilers), productivity
    applications (DECwrite, DECdecision, a good e-mail client), and most
    importantly, networking tools and applications.  Teamlinks, Pathworks,
    and other "workgroup" apps. could really insure that DEC is "first in
    class" for group-ware.
    
    When I first read the article, I was pissed at the atitude of the
    writers.  But after re-reading it and looking at the big picture, there
    is a lot of truth in what they say.
    
    --- Gavin (who has two roommates that each have their own computer
    besides me... and a microwave, espresso maker, etc.)
    
    

    re .61
    
    Well, for some time PCSG was one of the lucky engineering groups in
    that it didn't actually lose anybody, just that those who left weren't
    replaced.  That's changing now.  They've lost (TSFO) some people, and
    there's more than a few nervous engineers.
    
    According to the moderators I'm not supposed to talk about the effects
    of budget uncertainties on their current projects or its likely impact
    on our business.  Apparently it is 'inappropriate' to tell certain
    truthes in this conference.

    If it's the unvarnished truth, without opinions, then why should it be
    a problem?

    
    Back a few... Regarding imaging on PC
    
    I totally agreed the powerful capability of PC after touring WINDOW
    conference. All the multimedia packages are PC based. When you have 486
    /33/50 in chair, the performace plus graphics/SW package is so
    outstanding.
    
    I also saw our multimedia offering from DECUS, it's DECstation based.
    Nice picture too. However, it's clumsy, and so huge compare to PC.
    I bet the price is more expensive when you have DECStation in play
    for the same multimedia market.
    
    Just my .02
    Michael..
    

Having worked in PCSG for a while, and having lived with someone who worked
in PCSG for several years after I left, I would have to say that the number
one productivity increase that PCSG could see would be due to laying off
the right set of people, not hiring more.

Of course, the possibility that those people would get laid off is nil.

Good products, good hard workers, good vision, and it's a miracle that they
are, given the politics.

RE: Back more than a few!

The reason PC's boot so fast is that you have to constantly reboot them. :^)

    You mean if I reboot my VAX frequently, it will start booting faster?

.66:

T

    Re: .61
    
    I agree with your appraisal of what we need to do to become competitive
    again: write world-class software that runs on PCs.
    
    In a previous note, I mentioned the relative percentages of desktop
    devices in Corporate America (I don't have the *precise* numbers in
    front of me here):
    
    60% PC clones
    20% terminal
    10% MAC
    10% Other, of which only 20% is "workstations", or 2% of the market
    
    The installed base of MS-Windows, since two years ago,
    is 16 times the total installed base of VMS.
    
    Digital calls itself the "networking leader". Unfortunately, that
    description is not quite accurate if you are talking about raw
    numbers. If you count the number of actual
    networks, or, if you prefer, the number of actual CPUs that are
    connected to networks, the industry leader is Novell, whose product,
    Netware, changed the course of the way computers are used. Novell owns
    65% of the networking market, and Digital owns 12%.
    
    It will be just a matter of time before MIS directors see that they
    can buy fast file servers, 486s for everyone in the company,
    and off-the-shelf software to run their companies, for much cheaper
    than it costs to maintain a VMS or UNIX system and hire people to
    write special software for them to run their company.
    
    I might have mentioned in a previous note: one of our major customers,
    a huge insurance company, runs its "bank" - the part of the company
    that invests its money - on a Novell PC network. 35 stock brokers log
    in each day on a 386, connected to a Novell 3.11 server running on
    a Compaq SystemPro, which is in turn connected to Wall St., using
    "off-the-shelf" (though a little pricy) stock portfolio software.
    
    I believe that we need to look to manufacturing hardware and software
    that will work with Windows-NT, as the authors of the PC Week Article
    suggest. I suggest that our current VMS- and OSF-1-based strategies are
    weak in addressing the needs of the real computer users of today.
    
    Re: .1: I hope you have seen enough to realize that you might benefit
    from trying out some real PC software, which is far and away superior
    to anything Digital manufactures today, without question. MS-Word or
    Lotus AmiPro, Corel Draw, MS Excel and Lotus 1-2-3, Foxbase (cheaper
    and in many ways superior to Rdb), MS Publisher, the list goes on
    and on and on.
    
    As I said in my note to Bob Palmer: I see the computing world from
    both sides, a unique position in Digital. I engineer a VMS "application" -
    the PATHWORKS file server, and am porting it to Alpha. I see what the
    major new and installed-base customers - loyal Digital customers - now
    want. Take a close look at the major new "wins" for Digital. Somewhere
    buried in the text you will find PATHWORKS or the words "Network Operating
    System" (aka PATHWORKS).
    
    Re: Lexus, Accura: Windows-NT precisely represents the kind of threat to
    us that these cars represent to the American luxury automobile industry.
    Windows-NT is a real, multiple-virtual-address-space operating system
    that is in many ways superior to VMS. The number ONE way that it is
    superior to VMS is that it will run on Intel architecture machines.
    Secondarily, it has many or most of the features of VMS, having been
    designed by the guy who brought us VMS in the first place.
    
    But, unlike the American auto manufacturers, we do not have the luxury
    of attempting to produce a better product, because Mr. Gates (the CEO
    of Microsoft, for the un-initiated) and Mr. Cutler will probably be
    successful in their goal: to make Windows-NT *UBIQUITOUS*.
    
    I say: if you can't beat him, join him. Manufacture world-class
    machines that run his OS, and write world-class software that
    runs on his OS.
    
    The only thing which will likely change the computing landscape in the
    next couple of years - a landscape in which Mr. Gates' operating system
    becomes the OS of choice for the vast majority of computer users -
    is Apple's Newton (which for now is just a toy (:-) (:-) (:-)).
    
    Enough of this. I need to debug the Alpha file server.
    
    							Cheers
    							Jon

    I heard announced on the radio today, as I was propelling in my vehicle , 
    that DEC will disseminate news about new DEC PC's tomorrow.

    theses are made by us, not by 3rd part like the ones we currently sell, 
    the news also said that the prices will start from $899 (my car hit
    a puddle in the street as the price was being said, so Iam not 100% sure, it
    sounded like $899 though).
    /Nasser

    

    re .70
    
    I read the announcement in the Boston Globe today.  The article was
    cautiously favorable to us, with one warning from John Rose about us
    having inventory tied up for 4-5 weeks on a boat (some years ago Apple
    went through this analysis and wound up building its plant in the U.S.,
    when it figured out that inventory carrying costs at the time would
    eat up most of the savings of manufacturing outside the U.S. - don't
    know quite what the cost situation would be today).
    
    You heard correctly Nasser.  Prices start at $899, ranging up to $3000.
    
    /Butch

             <<< ASIMOV::$1$DUA4:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MARKETING.NOTE;5 >>>
                   -< Marketing - Digital Internal Use Only >-
================================================================================
Note 1947.2                Looking for the Big Picture                   2 of 20
MR4DEC::GREEN                                       152 lines  17-AUG-1992 15:59
                         -< DATAQUEST on MIPS shipped >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
  NOTE: The Dataquest High Technology Report is a copyrighted Dataquest 
        publication.  Through an agreement with Dataquest the Hudson 
	Information Center may distribute this information within Digital 
        for a limited trial period.  For more information contact 
	SHARE::LIBRARY.
		DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY	                       
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


  The DQ High Technology Report provides market intelligence for the systems, 
  software, telecom, and peripherals industries with weekly snapshots and 
  analysis of the most significant product, corporate, and governmental 
  activities affecting these industries.  

		DQ High Technology Report - Issue 6, Item 1

1               Scalar Compute Power--A Driving Force in the 1990s

Since Dataquest first published its data and forecast on scalar compute power,
there has been a steady stream of interest in this subject and many questions as
to how the dramatic introductions of 1991 will affect Dataquest's forecast.
Scalar compute power is one factor among many in the performance of a system.
(SPECmark, AIM, TPC, and other standardized or real applications benchmarks
should be used to compare specific computer models.)  We use the common measure
of MIPs.  However, MIPs are not presented as "million instructions per second,"
but rather as a relative measure of performance based on the following equation:
1 MIP equals the original scalar compute power of the VAX/780.

MIPs are presented for each of the following five product categories:

   o    Supercomputer--Vector compute power is of primary importance.  MIPs
        are used so that this segment can be compared with the rest of the
        industry.

   o    Mainframe--Database-handling power and throughput are of primary
        importance.  Mainframes are normally specified by an "IBM MIP," which
        is roughly twice that of a "VAX MIP."  To obtain a comparable MIP for
        this study, we multiplied IBM MIPs by 2.

   o    Midrange--Relative throughput and MIPs are primary measures of
        performance.

   o    Workstations--MIPs and graphics performance are of primary importance.

   o    PC--MIPs are used as the primary performance measure.

Dataquest Summary

Recent introductions of increasingly powerful processors, more emphasis on
multiprocessors, and the expectation of even more powerful standard processors
have caused us to re-evaluate and raise our MIPs forecasts.  PCs and
workstations dominate and lead the MIPs battle, but all five product categories
are driven by the same advances in technology.

In 1986, PCs and workstations combined to make up 82 percent of the MIPs
shipped.  During 1990, these two product categories represented 88 percent of
the MIPs shipped, and Dataquest forecasts that they will make up 95 percent of
the MIPs shipped during 1995 (see Table 1).

                                     TABLE 1
               Computer Systems Worldwide--MIPs Shipped and $K/MIP

                                 1986        1990        1995

 Factory Revenue ($M)
  Supercomputer               1,111.7     1,757.0     2,890.0
  Mainframe                  25,113.0    30,304.5    27,100.0
  Midrange                   23,260.4    29,927.3    33,400.0
  Workstation                 1,599.4     7,357.0    21,625.3
  Personal Computer          22,400.7    36,731.8    54,760.0
  TOTAL                      73,485.2   106,077.6   139,775.3

 Unit Shipments
  Supercomputer                   427         815       1,630
  Mainframe                    11,258      15,117      13,600
  Midrange                    623,635   1,025,235   1,218,000
  Workstation                  64,301     386,157   3,385,000
  Personal Computer         15,064,99  23,982,511  39,660,000
  TOTAL                    15,764,620  25,409,835  44,278,230

 Average Selling Price ($K)
  Supercomputer               2,603.5     2,155.8     1,773.0
  Mainframe                   2,230.7     2,004.7     1,992.6
  Midrange                       37.3        29.2        27.4
  Workstation                    24.9        19.1         6.4
  Personal Computer               1.5         1.5         1.4
  TOTAL                           4.7         4.2         3.2

 Average MIPs per Unit
  Supercomputer                 100.0       275.0     1,500.0
  Mainframe                      20.0        55.0       400.0
  Midrange                        1.2         6.0        50.0
  Workstation                     1.7        11.0       100.0
  Personal Computer               0.3         2.0        25.0
  WEIGHTED AVERAGE                0.4         2.3        31.6

 $K/MIP
  Supercomputer                 26.04        7.84        1.18
  Mainframe                    111.53       36.45        4.98
  Midrange                      31.08        4.87        0.55
  Workstation                   14.63        1.73        0.06
  Personal Computer              4.96        0.77        0.06
  WEIGHTED AVERAGE              13.02        1.79        0.10

 Millions of MIPs Shipped
  Supercomputer                  0.04        0.22        2.45
  Mainframe                      0.23        0.83        5.44
  Midrange                       0.75        6.15       60.90
  Workstation                    0.11        4.25      338.50
  Personal Computer              4.52       47.97      991.50
  TOTAL                          5.65       59.42    1,398.79

Source:  Dataquest (February 1992)

Workstations have shown the most massive gains, growing from 2 percent to 7
percent to 34 percent of MIPs shipped in 1986, 1990, and 1995, respectively.
Workstations have taken and will continue to take MIPs market share from the PC,
midrange, and mainframe markets.

The weighted average price per MIP has gone from $13,000 in 1986 to $1,800 in
1990.  The weighted average price per MIP will be $100 in 1995.  PCs, on the
average, were less than $800 per MIP in 1990 and will further decline to $60 per
MIP in 1995.

Part of the spreadsheet used in this analysis has been included.  Factory
revenue, unit shipments, and average selling prices are taken directly from the
Computer Systems Services Overview notebook (October 1991 forecast update).
Average MIPs per unit was estimated by Dataquest based on recent events.  The
last two sections of Table 1, thousands of dollars per MIP and millions of MIPs
shipped, are calculated from the previous sections.

DATAQUEST PERSPECTIVE

Dataquest believes that the availability of MIPs is one of the driving forces
behind the twin trends of the computer industry for the 1990s--open systems and
client/server computing.  Open systems, by their nature, are less efficient in
their use of computer hardware, but the availability of excess scalar compute
power ensures that open systems will be successful.  With 95 percent of the
scalar compute power shipped being placed next to the user by 1995, there must
be a way to use that power effectively (if not efficiently).  Client/server
computing will be successful not only for the standard reasons cited, but also
because businesses will want to fully utilize the massive investment in MIPs
located next to the users.

By Carl Flock


			DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY

    Hi again,
    
        The dataquest picture is really quite interesting.
    
        The most interesting part about it is that one of the distinctions
    that it draws - PCs vs. Workstations - is going to vanish as Windows-NT
    becomes the prominent OS on the "low-end" platforms.
    
        Consider: what would you call a 100-MIP computer with 32Meg of
    RAM, a 1 Gigabyte disk, and a 20+-inch color monitor? What about a
    50-MIP computer with 16Meg of RAM and a 150MB disk? What if both
    those machines had an "Intel Inside"? What if one of them was Intel,
    and one of them was Alpha. What if one of them was MIPS and one of them
    was Alpha. WHAT IF ALL OF THE ABOVE WERE TRUE AND IT RAN THE SAME
    OPERATING SYSTEM AND APPLICATIONS?
    
        When Windows-NT makes the scene, the distinction of whether you
    have a PC on your desk or whether you have a "workstation" on your desk
    is whether it runs most of the applications that are thought to be
    workstation applications. Once software developers realize the absolute
    gold-mine they can tap when they write their software to run on
    Windows-NT, I believe that most of the other operating systems
    available today will fall by the wayside.
    
        Furthermore, once Windows-NT is released to work on the Alpha
    boxes, it will not be long before people figure out that our high-end
    Alpha offering would make a terrific high-end file server (capable of
    serving hundreds of PC clients) running NT.
    
    							Jon

    
    
    RE: -.1
    
    You got it. Alphas will be commodity products!!!
    
    I'm not sure if everyone has realized this yet. It means we have to be
    as 
    slim an infrastructure as other commodity makers. 
    

>    
>    I'm not sure if everyone has realized this yet. It means we have to be
>    as 
>    slim an infrastructure as other commodity makers. 
    

	Right!  And here's the part we're not facing, as a 
	corporation.

	It doesn't take 100,000 people to sell/manufacture PCs.

	It doesn't take 50,000 people to do it.

	Not even 20,000.

	We are talking about 2000 people needed for the business
	that looks like it will dominate the market in the 90s.

	Field Service ?  Can you say TRW or GE ?  Why have a bunch
	of $ 50K/year techs running around replacing motherboards ?

	Phone support ?  Anybody heard of the offerings on CD for
	hundreds of PC applications -- these CD-ROMs contain
	support info, frequently asked questions, workarounds, etc.
	for most popular PC applications.  Who needs phone support ?
	There are at least 3 companies competing to provide these
	products to end users.

	Direct sales ?  When was the last time you heard of Zeos,
	Dell, Northgate or Gateway 2000 funding a sales force with
	cars, offices, secretaries, sales meetings in the Bahamas,
	etc., etc. ?  Forget it.

	Marketing ?  12 people could do the marketing for a microcomputer
	company.

	This is really serious, and Digital can either play the game,
	and become Gateway 2000, or not play the game, and become
	Wang.

	Not easy choices.

	Me, I'm boning up on Windows-NT, Lan Manager, Win32 programming,
	and every PC application I can afford.  I figure anything less is the
	short-route to unemployment.

	Steve H

Re .74
	  Hi,


	  If Digital does become a commodity PC manufacturer,
	  this means it will be in a market where:

	  o  The operating system of choice, Windows NT, is not owned
	     by Digital

	  o  The applications of choice are not owned by Digital

	  o  The networks of choice, Novell or LAN manager, are
	     not owned by Digital

          One conclusion that we could make from this is that
          Digital will be a very much smaller company within the
          next five years. 

	  What future for VAX/VMS and OSF?

	  Cheers,

		Mike.
	  

    
    It is the end of an era. We used to make EVERYTHING that was needed
    for a computer system. Now the game is to make a strategic piece and
    let others fill in the voids. And our infrastructure must change 
    drastically. 
    
    The ironic thing is: DEC (Ken) loved to talk about how Wall Street 
    didn't understand long term strategy, didn't understand the computer
    industry. But WALL STREET SAW THIS COMING FOUR YEARS AGO!! DEC is 
    only now waking up internally to what has happened. But Wall street, 
    as evidenced in our stock price, has been aware of it for a long time. 
    

    All the praise of PC's in this note is for office applications.
    (Oh.. and imaging.. which I guess means scanning and image and
    using it in a database or a document  oh wow ;-).  )
    
    Spreadsheets and wordprocessors.
    
    Is this group of people biased towards office applications?
    
    Can't workstations find a market in scientific and engineering
    applications?   Isn't this one of Digitals strengths?    Isn't
    that where our incredible success of the 1980's came from (while
    we "missed the boat" in the low-end overseas PC assembly bussiness)?
    
    There are more MS-DOS PC's out there than workstations.   but, I but
    there's more NES systems ouyt there too.   Have you ever seen how 
    fast an NES reboots??!  Wow!   It's much simpler to use too.
    
    
    Paul, software engineer... doesn't spell check for informal
    communications.

    General discussion of Digital's marketing and product strategies takes
    place in NODEMO::MARKETING.

Re .78

	  Hi,

	  Please look at the figures for market sizes.

          Yes there is a lucrative market for engineering and
          scientific workstations, just as there are markets for
          mainframes and supercomputers. What we're saying in
          this note is that the PC market is as big as all those
          markets combined; PC system sales represent roughly
          half of all systems sold. With the introduction of
	  the Alpha PC and Windows NT the UNIX workstation market
	  is going to be squeezed and the VMS workstation market
	  will shrink to insignificance.

          In the future, the workstation market may be dominated
          by higher specification Alpha machines, and they will
          probably be running Windows NT and not UNIX.
	  
	  Cheers,

		Mike.

    Ah... you include Windows NT in your definition of PC...
    but I think NT machines will be closer to workstations
    or minicomputers than to MS-DOS machines. 
    
    The market size of PC's (which I define as IBM PC compatible
    micros running MS-DOS) is large.   But what is the work?  
    Repackaging of off the shelf components?
    
    Application development and systems integration.
    
    I agree with the person who said that PC's should be just one part of 
    our strategy.   And I don't think this attitude comes from "arrogance".
    It comes from my hope that DEC will continue to be the developer of
    new technology.    I don't think there's much opportunity in the PC
    market.
    
    And I don't agree that VMS is a "dinosaur" (it's more advanced than MS-DOS).
    

    
    Today's mantra:
    
    		VAX is Betamax. 
    
    		VAX is Betamax
    	
    		VAX is Betamax. 
    
    Because that's just what it is. Sure it's better. I always believed
    it was better (Sony Beta, I mean.)  But would you open a Video store 
    today and only sell or rent Betamax tapes? No way! But that's 
    what Digital is. We are offering a superior, albeit more expensive, 
    solution, but only a small portion of the market is interested. 

This might sound like a dumb answer, why don't we drop the price on VMS??

	That might have worked if it had been done a few years ago, but 
	if someone offered to *give* you a Betamax today, would you
	bother to pick it up?

					Tom_K

    Betamax is still widely used, but only in the TV broadcast industry.
    Why?   Because it is better than VHS!   A niche market to be sure, but
    it exists.

    >>      -< I thought it was U-Matic that the TV industry used? >-
    
    I think this is correct, at least it was 7-8 years ago when I worked
    with a guy whose night job was with a cable TV station.
    
    For those who care what we're talking about, both VHS and Betamax are
    1/2-inch format with a certain resolution capability.  U-Matic is a
    3/4-inch format with resolution that blows away both of them.
    
    ... Bob
    

    Re: why don't we sell VAXs and VMS cheaper?
    
    Answer: we do, and the customers (including our loyal customers)
    are not interested (except see below).
    
    VMS does not run most of the high-quality applications that exist today
    that allow people to get their jobs done.
    
    VMS does not run fast, even as a file server. Novell Netware is *MUCH*
    faster as a file server.
    
    But we *DO* have a market niche: Digital is the SOLE MANUFACTURER of
    high-capacity file servers (500-1000 PCs). As I said in a previous
    note, many or most of Digital's sales today is either new PATHWORKS business
    or PATHWORKS and database integration business. Look for the words
    "Network Operating System" in the sale. You'll find them.
    
    The scary part is: Windows-NT comes with the file server and client
    software built in. That's what I was talking about in my previous note:
    when MIS managers realize that with Windows-NT and off-the-shelf
    packages they can run their business, without any special "solution
    selling", then not only VMS/OSF/UNIX will be obsoleted, but also the
    army of sales/sales support people employed by Digital and the rest
    of the "solution-selling" computer companies.
    
    We need to change with the times, to find our way "around the rock
    in the road".
    
    							Jon

    RE .88
    
>    VMS does not run fast, even as a file server. Novell Netware is *MUCH*
>    faster as a file server.
    
    Yup.  Always will.  Novell can't do much else but serve files.  So?
    
>    But we *DO* have a market niche: Digital is the SOLE MANUFACTURER of
>    high-capacity file servers (500-1000 PCs). As I said in a previous
    
    Eh?  Tell it to Compaq.  Where are our disk arrays, etc?

    U-matic, the 3/4" format, is used in studios.  The Betamax 1/2" format
    is used for news gathering in the field, due to its more compact size.
    
    Both formats were developed by Sony and share several characteristics.
    
    End of digression on VCR formats.  The point I was trying to make is
    that Betamax is not a particularly good example of the better
    technology losing.  It did lose in the consumer market, and as long as
    you qualify it that way you are ok.   But it survives in a niche, and
    the same is possible for any technology that can find a good fit.

	And VMS will likely survive in some niches. But does Digital
	want to be relegated to niche-player status?

					Tom_K

re Note 2054.90 by YAMS::DICKSON:

>     U-matic, the 3/4" format, is used in studios.  The Betamax 1/2" format
>     is used for news gathering in the field, due to its more compact size.
  
        Actually, it's Betacam that is used a lot in commercial TV.
                           ^^^
        It is not compatible with the home-oriented Betamax format,
        although it may have the same physical dimensions.

        Bob

So, "To Evolve" means to abandon development of new technologies and
join the clone commodity game?

There are great possibilities for future computing architectures/styles.
DEC introduced interactive computing and mini-computers.  Something
similar *can* happen again.   DEC is an engineering company.

We can exploit a market that still wants to buy the old MS-DOS/Intel 
computers while we wait.   But, that should *never* become our main 
focus.   Not DEC.

VAX, 680X0 and ALPHA are all pretty on the inside.
Not true of Intels 'X86 chips.  IMO.

-Paul

    
>VAX, 680X0 and ALPHA are all pretty on the inside.
>Not true of Intels 'X86 chips.  IMO.
    
    
    Intel sold over 21 million chips last year. Next closest vendor was
    about 750,000 chips. Nobody cares about the inside of chips. 

    Our main focus should be customers.

    Our goal should be profitable growth.

    Nostalgia for the "glory days", "DEC is an engineering company",
    disdain for personal computers...  These are distractions at best, and
    our epitaph as worst.
    
    It's a new world, and there had better be a new Digital ready for it.

    Previously, DEC made money by tackling the hard problems.  Unfortunately, 
    it seems to have somehow gotten twisted into making what we work on hard 
    to do.  That way, it still feels like we are tackling the hard problems.
    
    The PC and other computer markets have hard problems that need to be 
    solved and that customers are willing to pay serious money for.  That's
    where we need to go to make our money.  But, we need to remember to not
    make it any harder than it needs to be.  If it's easier, faster, better
    and cheaper to do our work on a PC than on a VAX, then we should do it.
    If NT becomes a more prevalent, more friendly and cheaper standard than
    U*ix, then we should support and encourage it.  Customers that see us
    making our methods of problem solving unnecessarily difficult are probably 
    not going to see us as the ideal solutions vendor.
    
    Steve

>    If NT becomes a more prevalent, more friendly and cheaper standard than
>    U*ix, then we should support and encourage it. 

	But if we wait until it does reach those goals, it'll be
	too late. We have an opportunity to get in on the ground
	floor of an operating system that has the potential to
	be the portable platform UNIX always aspired to be but never
	quite was - unlike UNIX, we can do it right and capture
	a big piece of market share. Yes, there is the risk that
	NT will fail. I don't think it will, though - the basic
	OS design is solid, and there's a ready-made market for
	it.

	We can either make our biggest software investment in OSF/1
	and OpenVMS, or NT. OSF/1 and OpenVMS seems safer, since
	they already exist - but even if NT fails, they're never 
	going to displace PC-based solutions, and if it succeeds,
	they will dwindle into very small niches. NT has the
	potential to be *the* universal software platform within
	a very few years - if that does happen, it's one party
	we can't afford to be late to - we will go the way of Wang.

	Our best bet is to make our software investment in NT *today*.
	
	Mike

RE .94

>    Intel sold over 21 million chips last year. Next closest vendor was
>    about 750,000 chips. Nobody cares about the inside of chips. 

     Where did you get this number of 750,000 from?  I imagine motorolla
sold more than this amount of 680X0 chips.  They are used in apples, amiga's
atari's pc's.  They are also very popular in embedded systems many engineering
groups even in this company use them for things like terminal servers and
such.  Other companies use them for laser printers and Xwindow terminals.
Many people do care what the inside of a chip looks like.

bill powers

>>  <<< Note 2054.88 by RANGER::JCAMPBELL >>>
    
    I take exception to Mr. Campell's following three assertions: 
    
    1>> Re: why don't we sell VAXs and VMS cheaper?
    1>> Answer: we do, and the customers (including our loyal customers)
    1>> are not interested (except see below).
    
    VMS has further to go to be competitive to UNIX price wise. 
    I think we'll see, once Alpha is introduced, very aggressive pricing
    when compared to SVR4 and OSF/1 and other UNIX offerings. Obviously 
    we have much further to go to compare with DOS, WNT or even MAC-OS. 
    
    We still have many customers very interested in VAX && VMS. The
    culmination of Alpha, XPG3 branding, the envy around our cluster 
    technology and, those many, many other modules and features, 
    for instance, GKdriver, has kept VMS in the hearts of our installed base 
    and even helped win new businesses, giving them a competitive advantage. 
 
    2>>VMS does not run most of the high-quality applications that exist today
    2>>that allow people to get their jobs done.
    
    I think this is one of VMS's greatest strenghts, we have books of 
    applications, new ones every day and VMS stays up and you can cluster
    it if you don't believe me. If I had a business, say 'Hot Sauces R Us'
    I'd use scotch bonnet peppers from Costa Rica (a very pro-VMS central
    american country) and I'd use VMS before any UNIX variant or waiting 
    until NT arrives. 
    
    What applications do you think we're missing? 
    
    3>>VMS does not run fast, even as a file server. Novell Netware is *MUCH*
    3>>faster as a file server.
    
    TGV claims their NFS server (on VMS) is as fast as any in the industry 
    and much faster than SUN. Of course Multinet (NFS) on a Flamingo will be 
    faster than Novell on a 486 or 586 with Novell. If pathworks isn't as 
    fast as Novell then bash Pathworks (it sure sells though) but VMS is still 
    the best around operating system I've seen, and getting better daily.  

    
    I did make a mistake. Sorry. 
    
    Here are the correct number from IDC. 
    
    	1991 Chip Unit Sales:
    
    		Intel: 		21,200,000
    		Motorola: 	 1,800,000
    		Sun:		   230,000
    		MIPS:		    78,000
    
    	All others were less than 50,000. 
    
    	The point is still the same: Intel dominates. VAX didn't even make
    	the list. 

Not being technically oriented, would it be possible to have software such as
 EXCEL written for Alpha (assuming it was written) include an optional routine
to convert a user's file created on an intel platform?

						Regards Phil

    It's more likely that Digital and IBM declined to submit figures to IDC
    or whoever was gathering the data.

    Since this discussion has gone off the deep end into subjects currently
    being dicussed in ASIMOV::MARKETING, please continue the discussion
    there.  KP7 or Select to add the conference to your notebook.
    
    Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL