Conference 7.286::digital

It's reassuring to know other people are paying attention to the enviroment that
Digital will eventually have to find a place in. Unfortunately if we keep 
following current directions we will miss this train also. We will have to run 
to catch it as it is.

D:\LG>

    If anyone is interested in the Bryan Higgs memo, I can send it, or
    I can post it if enough interest. I hesitated from putting it
    into the notesfile because it is 74 blocks long, a very careful,
    insightful analysis of WNT and why it is important for us to port
    such packages as RDB to it.
    
    							Jon

>    Bill Gate is using WNT to steal the market of middle and
>    high end computer.  Should we port WNT to every Alpha machine
>    to let him succeed? 

	Bill Gates is selling software. Why should that software not run
	on our hardware? If we'd pushed Unix boxes in the days when all
	Unix ran on our boxes we'd own the Unix market today.

			Alfred

Since my memo seems to have made its way around the network pretty much all by
itself, already, I might as well tell you where to find it.

You can pick up a copy at BROKE::DBS$PUBLIC:WINDOWS_NT_TRIP_REPORT.PS/.TXT

If anyone in this conference can use this memo to encourage Digital to move in
this direction, I would be delighted to see it!

Bryan

    I support note .0 and feel this idea shioul be feed into the supply
    chain.  Jon is on target with his idea and if digital can use alpha
    as a pc server platform and create a industry standard we all win.
    Anyone who agrees please enter a note of support.
    
    Goood Idea
    Jay

    re: <<< Note 2138.4 by LABC::RU >>>
    
    But does VMS run on a $1500 box? (Clearly a rhetorical question).
    
    Ken...
    
    

    re .7
    
    An excellent article. It gave me, a novice in WNT, a good understanding
    of the basic NT capabilities and Microsoft strategies.
    
    Who is responsible in developing NT for Digital?
    
    --Ritva

    	Microsoft is responble for "developing NT." There are groups in
    Digital porting it to Digital hardware platforms. DECwest is porting NT
    to Alpha.

    
    
    	re .0
    
    	RIGHT ON!  We do have the resources to be a powerhouse in 
        this market.  I sell either with or against Netware practically
        on a daily basis.

    
    
    There is no doubt that WNT will be the operating system of the future. 
    But the architecture of choice will be INTEL NOT ALPHA!!!  
    
    For those of you who think otherwise please remember what happened the
    last 2 times we tried to RE-INVENT the PC market (the PRO and Rainbow
    fiascos).
    
    

    
    For client server implementations there will be two os:s
    
    		NT	or 	Netware
    
    Both will be available on Intel or RISC platforms (Netware on PA-RISC,
    maybe on Alpha?)  The hardware platform won't be important!!! The bulk
    of the sales will be Intel because it is the price/performance leader. 
    Really high performance needs will be satisfied by RISC machines, if 
    they maintain their lead of performance. (586/100 will be over 100
    specmarks!) 
    
    Palmer gets it actually: The customer is in the driver seat. The
    customer
    can choose between whatever HW he wants. Soon, he will choose between 
    whatever SW he wants. Palmer does get it. The rest of Digital still
    seems to be learning, though. 
    

re: .10

Relevant conferences:

	decwet::nt-developers	-- people developing on NT - mostly technical
	decwet::windows-nt	-- general NT issues

Many of the people with leadership roles participate in those conferences.
I hesitate to name names here, because I don't know all the correct roles, and
might easily get things wrong, but if you look in those two places, you're sure
to find the people you need (either directly, or by asking for referrals).
There is a NT Program Office, which, regrettably, doesn't have as much
visibility as it deserves.

re: .4

We've already given away the VMS and Unix markets.  We can't afford the 
attitude that Microsoft's success is necessarily our failure (nor can we afford 
to be careless in our dealings with Microsoft).  We're in the systems 
integration business; Microsoft isn't.  There's room for us to both be
successful.  

It would be nice to go back to the days of just one operating system, but it
would be foolish to dump VMS and OSF just yet.  What we can't afford to do
is to have only operating systems with little potential for market growth.  We
must invest in NT, because it's the best opportunity for profitable 
growth.

   Gary

    
    	re .13
    
    	If you think that the primary thrust of the Alpha architecture is
    	for us to re-invent the PC market, then I suggest that you are
    	misinformed.
    
    	John

>    There is no doubt that WNT will be the operating system of the future. 
>    But the architecture of choice will be INTEL NOT ALPHA!!!  
>    
>    For those of you who think otherwise please remember what happened the
>    last 2 times we tried to RE-INVENT the PC market (the PRO and Rainbow
>    fiascos).
 
	I've used a RAINBOW, I own a RAINBOW. ALPHA is no RAINBOW. The mistake
	we made with the Rainbow was that there were standards, especially in
	disk and graphic formats, that we ignored. The market wanted a super
	set of the IBM PC. We gave them an overlap that missed important parts.

	With WNT we have a chance to do it right. If both Alpha and Intel
	platforms have the same features than price and performance will win.
	All indications are that performance will be easy and price not too
	bad. P5 may make things interesting on the desk top but, IMHO, it is
	unlikely that they will beat us for servers. We've got systems for
	that. As long as we can do everything Intel can do when they can do
	it we've got a level playing field with WNT. We gave that away with
	the RAINBOW.

			Alfred

	PS: The problem with the PRO was that the OS was based on RSX rather
	than RSTS. :-)

    At P5, I think the Intel architecture will reach its top performance.
    Admittedly, the price-performance number will be advantageous for
    Intel for P5, but not beyond, IMHO. Alpha has the capability to
    become the the high-performance RISC standard for PCs *AND* servers.
    Eventually people will expect so-called 3G machines on their desks (1 GHz,
    1GB Ram, 1GB disk), as the applications people weld together from
    off-the-shelf components get more and more complex and multi-media
    applications become the norm rather than the exception.
    
    Now that we're cooking with gas, let's figure out how we can port
    our customers' software to a WNT or Novell server with WNT and
    DOS/Windows as the clients. It's really not that difficult a task.
    Let's plan for the future now, instead of letting the future be
    determined by the other vendors.
    
    						Thanks for listening
    						Jon

    And keep in mind that much of Intel's price/performance leadership
    stems from recent competition from AMD, Cyrix and IBM.
    
    Mark.

    Re .0:
    
    Thank you, thank you, thank you for making this visible to Palmer. A
    group of us were just talking this morning about sending upper
    management an ultimatum to the effect of "Get our act together in
    building software for PC's and Alpha/Intel NT or go out of business".
    
    -Ken

    
        	
    
>    	If you think that the primary thrust of the Alpha architecture is
>    	for us to re-invent the PC market, then I suggest that you are
>    	misinformed.
>    
>    	John


   No I totally understand what the thrust of Alpha is - to protect our
   VAX/VMS installed base.


>	If both Alpha and Intel platforms have the same features than
>       price and performance will win.
	

   I think not.  Both MicroSoft and Intel have a major advantage over us.
   It is called the 'installed base'.  Last count about 140 million Intel
   based machines running MS-DOS.  They can do a number of things to make
   sure DOS/INTEL users migrate only to NT/INTEL.

   If you doubt that, then think of the programs we put in place to make
   sure our VAX/VMS customers move to Alpha/VMS.

   I do feel that there is money to be made in the exploding NT market.
   Systems integration, training, and migration services are only a few 
   of the areas we could capitalize on.  Thats where I feel we should
   focus our investments and energies.

>>	If both Alpha and Intel platforms have the same features than
>>       price and performance will win.
>	
>   I think not.  Both MicroSoft and Intel have a major advantage over us.
>   It is called the 'installed base'.  Last count about 140 million Intel
>   based machines running MS-DOS.  They can do a number of things to make
>   sure DOS/INTEL users migrate only to NT/INTEL.

	Why is it more to MS advantage for people to move to WNT/INTEL over
	WNT/ALPHA? I believe that MW would rather see WNT on as many platforms
	as possible. Shutting out DEC or INTEL would be very foolish on their
	part. And I see no indication that they plan to make it hard for us
	or for people to move to WNT/ALPHA. Do you? What? Sure they could but
	why would they make it hard for us?

			Alfred

I take it for granted that big changes will come in the computer industry. 
These changes and the resulting competition will make it almost impossible for
one hardware platform or one operating system or one user interface to have a
monopoly.  There are lots of operating systems today, and there will be lots
tomorrow, albeit in a different mix.

Microsoft's Windows NT may be the "in" thing this year and next, and may indeed
be wonderful, but I do not think it will take over the world.  If customers want
Windows NT on every AXP machine, then let's give it to them!  Rather, let's sell
it to them!

Paul

    re .23
    
    Nobody is contemplating the pre-mature deaths of either OSF/1 or VMS.
    We, as a corporation can not afford to bury our heads in the sand as we
    did during the meteoric rise of MS-DOS. Just imagine if the microVAX II
    could have run MS-DOS at its introduction. At the time, we could have
    taken control of the high-end DOS market.
    
    Whether ALPHA can compete with P5 at the low end remains to be seen.
    ALPHA does appear do have lots of potential as a server class machine.
    
    The bottom line is that the customer is going to buy WNT whether we
    VMS snobs (I include myself in this group) like it or not.  DEC's best
    hope is to give our present operating systems the capability of
    supporting large WNT client environments. At the same time, we need to
    make sure that our hardware is not locked out when WNT is released.
    
    As far as Microsoft's ambitions are concerned, I say "If you can't beat
    'em, join 'em".  I wholeheartedly agree with previous noters who say
    that there is room enough for both Microsoft and DEC in this market.
    
    Russ 

    The last several replies have touched on a favorite theme.  The ability
    of Digital to "direct" the market and the ability of Digital to react
    to the market.

    Digital's influence beyond the installed base in nil, and _in_ the
    installed base it is only on our midrange systems.  We imitate others
    more than we are imitated.

    In all other areas we've got to get real humble and understand that we
    have to balance the "promotion" of OSF/1 and VMS with the acquiescence to
    do what the customer wants us to do and anticipate what the customer
    wants in the future.

    I'm old enough to remember "Digital who?" and the years when Digital
    had to establish its reputation and not coast on the previous decade's
    work.  Well, that era has returned.

It is very interesting to read all your opinions about future directions and 
strategies. However, I would be particularly interested in the opinion of the
people that were addressed in the mail in .0. So what was the answer (if any)?

Timo 

Thanks for sending this note to senior management. This industry is
changing dramatically and fundamentally though the state of the economy
can deceive us into believing that a recovery will save us. 

I believe DEC has a very unique opportunity to regain market leadership and 
I'm encouraged by the themes that Palmer presented. Let's hope that we can 
learn from our customers and deliver what they need better than anyone else.

 

    re .0
    
>3. Negotiate with Novell to port their special version of "native" Netware
>OS to all the Alpha platforms. The Alpha high-end systems are perfect
>for running this kind of OS.
    
    Taken care of.  Novell released Portable Netware some time ago, which
    is essentially a Netware C kernel that can be ported to a number of
    platforms, including VMS and Unix.  DEC, IBM and HP are among those who
    have licenced this and are implementing it.
    
    So, while I may applaud you sentiments I deplore your homework.  If you
    want to send messages to BP then don't waste his time telling him to do
    things that are already under way.

    Re .-1:
    
    Don't be so quick to criticize a proposal.  .0 is referring to a port
    of Native Netware to AXP (tm) systems.  This is the strategy that
    Novell is using to support HP's PA-RISC systems.  My understanding is
    that Native Netware is very different from Portable Netware (which is
    intended to run over another OS host like VMS or UNIX).
    
    -Ken

    Yes, native and portable NetWare are very different.  A porting of
    Native NetWare to Alpha-AXP would (IMO) be a very good plan, but it
    does not seem likely that it will come to pass.
    
    	Peter
    	PATHWORKS for VMS (NetWare) engineer