Conference 7.286::digital

    RT-11, IAS, DOS-11, Windows-NT (oops... :-)

Digital Unix (OSF/1) - biggest and best :-).

    Wow, that's an interesting statement...
    
    If the implication is that everybody else's operating systems have
    evolved, is that a bad thing? Does it mean, then, that IBM is so bad at
    it that they have to keep starting from scratch?
    
    
    ...tom

    Lou Gerstner's getting a lot of good press these days as he's showing 
    results -- the IBM results are backing him up. There are many customers
    who'll take him at his word.  In fact, a Digital customer recently told
    me (post Turbo-laser announcement) that there is *no* benchmark that
    Digital puts forward that impresses his CIO. Instead, the CIO asks
    about numbers of columns of press coverage on Digital and reads Wall St
    analyst reports that still question our viability.
    
    Instead of poking at Lou's inaccuracy (because it won't be the last
    that he makes to IBM advantage) let's question his motivation for the
    quote and ways to counter. Likely he's reinforcing IBM customer loyalty
    and trying to lessen emphasis on standards. Is there a strategy here?
    Is there a messaging opportunity that we should understand?
    
    /Larry

    Mica -> Windows-NT
    

    This string itself is a good indication of the problems we still face.
    Someone starts off with a comment about what is obviously a marketing
    statement and the next 6 Digital replies go merrily down an obscure
    technical rathole. Who cares how many obscure PDP11 operating systems
    we can claim credit for? Of course Gertsners statement has no basis in
    fact, the truth is not a requirement in marketing statements anyway. 
    
    What has not been mentioned so far in this string were Gertsners
    statement of support for OS/2. I though that was significant because it
    means that he has been sold a bill of goods internally that will come
    back to haunt him and IBM. There is no way that OS/2 is going to win,
    short of the Federal Government breaking up Microsoft, which seems
    unlikely even given the temporary Sporkin insanity. The good news IMHO
    is that this means that IBM will continue to dump unbelievable amounts
    of resources down the OS/2 rathole, thus giving us and other
    competitors a temporary advantage. The trade press will someday look
    back on that statement as the beginiing of the end for Gertsner.
    
    So what should we do? Since NT is the only pony in sight that is not dying
    in mid-stream, we should jump on that puppy for all it's worth and ride it
    to a much needed recovery. Yeah, yeah, WIN95 must be included, also, at
    the desktop, but we won't have much to deferrentiate us there. It's at
    the NT Server level that we can absolutely flatten the competition with
    Alpha.
    
    But as Dennis Miller always says...that's just my opinion and I could be
    wrong.
    
    -OFWAMI-
                                                                 

    
    	After a well-deserved three week vacation, and an interesting DEC
    Hockey Tourney in Marlboro last weekend, several observations:
    
    	- IBM is being hurt by H-P, not Digital. H-P is eating their AS/400
    	  installed base alive, beating them 2 to 1 in big corporate PC
    	  deals, and going head-to-head against the AIX O/S with HP-UX.
    	  We are virtually a non-event here, with a exception of our own
    	  existing install base of end-users and existing VARs.
    
    	- IBM and H-P are making money, gobs of it. We are still in serious
    	  cut costs mode (just look at the decrease of our R&D expenditures
    	  Q3 1995 to Q3 1994), and are still perceived in the marketplace
    	  as a weak sister for a big technology bet.
    
    	- We still haven't solved our internal politics problems around
    	  which account, or groups of accounts, belongs to who - SBU, ABU,
    	  C&P, MCS, etc. This is causing great consternation in our large
    	  "borderline" accounts (these of less than $5MM annual spending
    	  with Digital, but greater than $500K), and a heated
    	  re-examination of their relationship with us. No one likes being
    	  left at the dance...
    
    	- Our existing reseller DO NOT like multiple sales reps from
    	  Digital calling on them, and processing orders for what they
    	  regard as a single transaction (C/S computing includes PCs,
    	  Servers, networks, and services). They also feel the problem of
    	  their new prospects/customers wanting their value-added (read:
    	  application software) on a "more popular platform".
    
    	- We refuse to address the marketing problems at the product level
    	  and have instead chosen to marshall our resources around a
    	  "corporate" campaign basically focused on print advertising with
    	  low-cost TV spots. 
    
    	- The recruitment of new resellers is cumbersome, haphazard, with
    	  real focus on competitors' VARs instead of "building our own".
    
    	And we are still suffering sales "bailouts". Lost two good sales
    	people in the Chicago office alone while I was on vacation. People
    	in the field are burning out at an alarming rate, and our current
    	micromanagement quarterly numbers focus is just making matters
    	worse.
    
    	I fear we are destroying Digital to satisfy Wall Street, and senior
    	management's options pockets.
    
    
    		the Greyhawk

    And the IBM misinformation campaign continues.  In this weeks
    INFORMATIONWEEK "Top Story", IBM says it will charge customers 15% of
    the cost of their AS/400 hardware for the 64-bit upgrade.
    
    What 64-bit upgrade?

    
    re greyhawk ...
    welcome back... I need a vacation too!
    
     I agree that the target of that message was probably NOT Digital, but HP.
     Among the 4 (us,IBM, HP and SUN), the last two have the "least" amount 
     of OS experience. It couldn't have been SUN since it is HP that is taking
     away IBM's business on MULTIPLE fronts.
    
     Now given that Digital need not counter directly, but instead exploit the
     situation. It would be interesting if say Don Harbert, send a letter
     to the editor, just casually listing Digital's experience in OS, or
     we have another advert. to address that we are AHEAD of both.
    
     But what would I, the "lesser" player do at this time in the trenches? 
     #1 is to GROW my own business while the giants fight! We can and should
     use this "quiet" times to focus on REBUILDING: credibility, reputation,
     sales, etc and chip away their share. Afterall, that was how HP did
     it to us!
     

    re the IBM 64-bit upgrade for AS400:
    
    IBM has been advertising for a number of months their "numbers" for
    the AS400 line......4.9% interest rate, 25,000 applications, and
    64-bit next generation architecture. 
    
    Mark
    

>                      <<< Note 3824.8 by GLDOA::WERNER >>>

>    ... go merrily down an obscure technical rathole ...
    					      ^^^
>    ... dump unbelievable amounts of resources down the OS/2 rathole ...
    							      ^^^
>    ... Since NT is the only pony in sight ...
    			      ^^^^
>    ... jump on that puppy for all it's worth ...
    		      ^^^^^
    
    Somebody spending too much time at the SPCA?   :-)
    
    -Mark

  Sorry to go down another famous DIGITAL technical rathole but 64-bit
  AS/400 claims are not hype.

  It's an announced direction of IBM that the new AS/400 ("Silverlake
  series") processors will be based on the PowerPC chip. If they use
  the PPC 620, that will give them true 64-bit capability.

                                   Atlant

    
    Geez,
    
    it seems like just last week that the questions was:
    
    		'are 64 bit computers needed?'
    
    Now its 'ANNOUNCING our next generation 64 BIT COMPUTER'.