Conference 7.286::digital

    This issue is _precisely_ the reason why a group of software
    consultants in the Field were sent to training on the Sector 7 toolkit
    for VMS to UNIX migration.
    
    We are (supposedly) trying to get those customers who want to migrate
    to UNIX to migrate to Digital UNIX on our Alpha boxes with our help.
    
    Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, we have yet to perform an 
    actual conversion using this toolkit.  I don't think we've dangled this
    worm long enough in front of the right customers yet.  If you have
    customers who are interested, get the info on our Sector 7 services.
    
    Information about the Sector 7 initiative can be found at (NEWVAX/
    ZIGLAR/EISVAX)::SECTOR7.  There are pointers to preliminary service
    descriptions, as well as toolkit descriptions, etc. in that conference.
    
    FWIW, the toolkit looked impressive, replacing most VMS system service
    and RTL calls with code libraries that have the identical function
    names and formats, but execute within the UNIX environment.  It even
    includes an RMS look-alike, SMG, and more.
    
    If we pay attention to this, we might just save our current customer
    base from migrating to other vendors.
    
    -- Russ

    A great idea!!!  But we are a day late and a dollar short. 

ref .1

	IBM's migration tools are neither better nor easier than what they
claimed.  We do have good toolkits and well-trained technical experts to help
customer to migrate to Digital UNIX environments.  However, the key point
is that	when IBM, HP, SUN, ... ask our customers to move from VMS to UNIX,
they are not only talking about customer-build application migration.  They
are talking about to move the whole business from VMS to UNIX.  This action
also includes applications developed by software vendors other than customer
themselves.  Many times, those applications from software vendors are used by
customer for their core business to generate revenues.  Before 1990s, 
IBM paid 2+ billion dollars per year (yes, $2,000,000,000.00/year) to 3rd
party software companies to develope applications on IBM platforms.  I don't
have numbers for the last couple of years.  The bottom line is that there are
more applications/APIs, more CASE tools and more migration toolkits available 
on their platforms.  Therefore, when customers decide to move to UNIX 
environments, by moving to IBM's platforms they can either choose to buy 
existing applications which can eliminate migration time and potential risks 
or to use vendor-provided migration toolkits to reduce risks and ensure 
integrity.  in addition, customer can add more applications for their business
needs to either improve performance or bring more revenues.  This is how 
they claim that it is easier and better to move to IBM's UNIX.  To compete
against IBM, HP ... , we need to encourage/motivate more and more 
applications developed on out platforms.

	In case if customers must migrate their applications to out platforms,
our offer should not be limited to the toolkits only.  Not only should we
be technically well-equipped but also business-oriented.  For example, if a
customer has a multi-hundred gigabytes proprirtory database for text search
wants to migrate to Digital UNIX platforms.  We should ask ourselves
what is our added value.  I believe our added values is not just know how
to use the toolkits more effective than the customer can.  If our consultants
can spend a little more time to learn this customer's business and to use
this knowledge to modify customer's workflows, improve customer's search 
engine, enhance database integrity, refine multi-thread calls, ...etc.  
Customer certainly will appreciate that when they ask for Digital's help
what they will get is not only  a few people using toolkits to put their 
applications on a system of 64 bits and faster CPU but also a better system 
so they can run business better.

ref .2

	If we can take action now it will never be too late!

    re: .3
    
    Many of those issues were discussed in the class.  Since the migration
    emphasis is on "level 1" migrations (i.e., get them up and running on
    the UNIX system ASAP; serious modifications are only done once the new
    system is running), emphasis was placed on finding
    component-by-component replacements on Digital UNIX.
    
    Now, if you have a customer who wants to throw most everything away and
    restructure for a new system, you can't rely on toolkits, etc.  But,
    then again, I haven't heard of that many cash-rich organizations which
    can afford to totally re-engineer their business software right now.  
    I'm sure it happens, but, frankly, I haven't heard many reports about
    it, especially in my area.
    
    I seem to hear more about customers moving applications or groups of
    applications to UNIX.  Many seem to want to get to that platform ASAP
    to cut loose VMS and VAX hardware.  That's where the Sector 7 toolkit
    and services come in.
    
    Now if we could just let our _customers_ know that we are ready to help
    them...
    
    -- Russ

    If you havent heard of many customers making major re-engineering
    changes you arent listening very well.
    
    Notice that SAP R/3 is the hottest thing on the market. Pickup just
    about any trade rag and read about all the moves to it. And the amazing
    ammount of money being made consulting to SAP customers.
    
    Also note SAP has droped support of VMS.
    
    Wake up folks, Unix is doing very well, outside of DEC. A porting kit
    to run old VMS code on Unix systems is flogging dead horses.
    
    
    

    Well, those "dead horses" are very important to many customers.  If 
    you tell them that moving from VMS to Digital UNIX is just as easy
    (or hard) as moving it to HP-UX, then you've ignored the fact that
    Digital is in the BEST position to help you move from VMS to UNIX
    (if that is want you want to do).  Yep, some customers are taking
    this "oportunity" to re-engineer their applications, but they really
    hate being forced to re-engineer...
    
    So sell Digital UNIX to new customers from SUN or HP, but don't
    ignore the deep pockets of our existing OpenVMS customers who may
    want to move to Digital UNIX.
    
    				-John

    >So sell Digital UNIX to new customers from SUN or HP, but don't
    >ignore the deep pockets of our existing OpenVMS customers who may
    >want to move to Digital UNIX.
    
    >				-John

    If an existing customer want's to move to Unix -- Move them to 
    our Unix.
    
    If they don't want to Migrate Let them stay on the Digital 
    OS they are on (why spend Sales and Sales support Dollars
    to win the customer twice?).
    
    Let new customers decide which OS is best for the business 
    problem they are trying to solve.
    
    "No Fear" We have OpenVMS, Unix and WNT -- Sell all of them
    
    And stop this religious bickering.  When our Unix product has
    consoldated it's mastery of SUN, HPUX and AIX markets I'll 
    personally help churn the Installed base to our Unix product 
    
    -- Till then sell Digital and all of our products and all of their
    strenghts.
    
    SAP is hot, very hot today.  But I've seen many hot products come
    and go in this business, mostly because of arrogance...
    
    JMHO
    
    John W.

    re -1
    
    >   SAP is hot, very hot today.  But I've seen many hot products come
    >   and go in this business, mostly because of arrogance...
    
    SAP R/3 is roughly 3500-4000 installs world-wide, and climbing.  Are 
    all these sites the same?  Of course not; but what does it take to run
    SAP?
    
    -	*Any* system needs 14GB of disk to be marginally useful.
    -	You need at least 256MB of RAM as well (on Digital UNIX at least).
    -	Development and Test/QA environments are physically separate boxes
    	 and 2-tier (DB and Applications on same machine).
    -	Production systems are usually three-tier; DB backends, and 
    	 smaller but still powerful application servers in the middle.
    -	Production systems also require DECsafe ASE for failover
    	 capability, and lots of TLC.
    -	Many sites nearing production are looking at 40-100GB shadowed
    	for their first phase.
    
    So a reasonable expectation for an SAP win could be $500K to $2M; let's
    say $1M on average (including service revenue, and installation SI $$$).
    If Digital had 20% of all the existing 3500 installs, that would be
    roughly $700M.  We would also be in position to leverage this into
    a stronger position with our other application partners, MCS, SI
    in the UNIX market ... And I could be understating the revenue
    opportunity here ....
    
    So even given arrogance of the vendor, implementation partners, and
    platform providers (i.e., US FOLKS), this represents a **SUBSTANTIAL**
    market for the kinds of high-end configurations we would like to be
    selling more of (I would think ... someone out there tell me if I am
    wrong, because I am just a humble RMWI Noter*) TODAY, not just wishful
    thinking.  (By the way, SAP wants to have 15,000 installs by the year
    2000.)
    
    What's the point (you say)?  SAP is UNIX-only for now; the NT
    implementation is not there yet for the size of configuration I am
    discussing.  While OpenVMS would work, SAP made a decision to go away
    from this as a supported platform.  And without the decision to enable
    treating UNIX as an equal to VMS some time ago (for commercial
    clients), I ask would we have the ability to challenge HP, IBM, and SUN
    in this space?? (My money says no.)
                                    
    Maybe we could just enable OpenVMS on UNIX as a "habitat", like we did
    for SVR4?  At any rate, someone ought to have a look at what types of
    applications the clients in .0 were looking to migrate to UNIX; perhaps
    there are specific categories that are in more "danger" than others, and
    we would be better to pre-empt IBM, HP, etc. by moving our customers
    first.
    
    Charles  (* RMWI = Read mostly, Write infrequently)
                                                                 

       > If an existing customer want's to move to Unix -- Move them to
       > our Unix.
       >
       > If they don't want to Migrate Let them stay on the Digital
       > OS they are on (why spend Sales and Sales support Dollars
       > to win the customer twice?).
    
    
    My point in .0 is that customers tell us that they do not want to
    migrate, but they go looking at migration anyway.  Because of that we
    need to be more active.
    
    Busy Dec Sales: "Good morning, Mr. XXXX.  How is it going?  May I come
    			over and tell you about Digital UNIX?"
    
    Mr. XXX:	    "Nah, don;t bother.  We love VMS"
    
    DEC:	    "Okay, well I talk to you soon."
    
    (a month later)
    
    DEC:	    "Gee, I noticed some new SUN boxes, what's going on?"
    
    XXX:	    "Well, UNIX is a big thing, we thought we would take
    			a look at it for some new applicaitons we are
    			thinking about."
    
    DEC:	    "I thought you were happy with VMS?"
    
    XXX:	    "Oh, of course that is our strategic platform, we
    			just thought we would look at UNIX."
    
    DEC:	    "What applications are you thinking about?"
    
    XXX:	    "Just some minor decision support the users want,
    		     don't worry about it."
    
    DEC:	    "We have a great UNIX, why didn;t you ask me?"
    
    XXX:	    "Well, you know how it is today.  We need open systems
    			and multiple sources.  The SUN people have been
    		 	calling on me about UNIX for a long time.  I have
    		 	always told them no, but I want to see how it works
    			for this data base application."
    
    
    Now this doesn;t look like a migration scenario, but it is.  And we
    will have to work much harder at this account.
     
 >   why spend Sales and Sales support Dollars to win the customer twice?
    
/joel
    

    Wow.....
    
    Great account control.
    
    Try dropping in on this guy sometime...unannounced.  You'd be amazed at
    what might happen.
    
    gc

    RE:                <<< Note 3992.10 by USCTR1::CROSBY_G >>>
    >>                     -< case for full commission >-
    >>Wow.....
    >>Great account control.
    >>Try dropping in on this guy sometime...unannounced.  You'd be amazed at
    >>what might happen.
    >>gc

    GET REAL gc!!!
    
    "Account control" is a myth.  Open systems (in whatever way the
    customer defines them) have put the *customer* in control of their own
    MIS.
    
    I sold for ten years, and part of that on 100% commission.  The
    marketplace has changed.  Maybe you should change your thinking, too.
    
    The prior reply was an excellent summary of what's happening in the
    installed-base.  I've seen it dozens of times.  Sales reps are covering
    unbelievably long lists of accounts.  "Strategic selling" of computers
    has gone the way of the dinosaur.
    

    >>> sales reps covering unbelievable long lists.........
    
    
    Once one learns that that statement is true, you can understand
    our problem. You cannot cover *all* bases *all* the time.
    Strategic selling is dead. But point to point contact and customer
    visits are not. We seem to have forgotten about relationships in
    dealing with people and the market we are in.
    
    -Sigh,
    Mike Z.

>>Also note SAP has dropped support of VMS.

SAP is for real, I hope everybody realizes that...and the fact that VMS
is not a supported platform is not good for VMS long term....look around at the
partnerships and alliances forming around this three tier C/S architecture
we keep hearing about relative to SAP R/3, UNIX is the back end and NT/UNIX
systems become application servers.  Clients are almost invariably PC's.  This
is a paradigm shift from VMS Cluster's with VT's or PC's running VT emulation
software.

I think it is VERY important to encourage VMS customers (who are willing) to
consider Digital UNIX and to aggresively challenge other UNIX solutions
that they may be looking at...Digital is not killing VMS, the industry is.
Digital is doing the right thing by supporting VMS customers as best we can
and by trying to provide a migration path to either UNIX or NT.  The good news
is that our UNIX solutions can (or soon can) compete pound for pound with the
rest and win.

On the ohter hand, what is wrong with positioning Digital UNIX as a 'start from
scratch' solution to VMS customers who want to abandon VMS?  I think we can take
on the others who will position thier UNIX in the same way and win!! I think
it's important to point out to customers that Digital is not 'abandoning' VMS,
but rather, offering TWO very robust alternatives for those customers who want
to move away from VMS, while still supporting those who wish to remain
there...we are 'doing the right thing'...being prudent.  The challenge is to
recognize a VMS customer who is going to start looking at UNIX and getting your
foot in the door...because it really makes sense that these customers go to
another vendor, they don't want to end up in the position they're in now, or at
least if they do, it's with a different vendor...

What we really need to do in the UNIX space is focus hard on system management
tools and high-availability solutions so as to meet or exceed the competition in
this area (a good example of this would be something like Advfs), and continue
to promote Digital UNIX and applications that become increasingly available for
this platform...like CA Unicenter on Digital UNIX for example, it's a competing
product to our Polycenter Suite (and not as good IMHO) but it does give
customers a choice, and helps to legitimize our UNIX offering.

Sales people dealing with VMS customers looking at UNIX definately have some
'over-coming' to do...but once you get beyond this with customers, our UNIX
offering is very competitive, IMHO. (and getting better by the hour).  My
point is this:  don't let customers paint you into a 'VMS only' corner.

-Stephen

> VMS long term
    
    Isn't that an oxymoron?   :-)  :-)

  ><<< Note 3992.14 by R2ME2::DEVRIES "All simple things were done by 1950!" >>>
                      -< ah, c'mon son, it's only a joke >-

>> VMS long term
    
  >  Isn't that an oxymoron?   :-)  :-)

    
    
    
    The Joke is not funny.
    
    
    
    I have stopped saying terse things and snide remarks about our
    Unix offerings.  I've done this not because my OPINION has changed
    but for the GOOD of Digital we have to put this type of nonsense 
    aside.
    
    I expect nothing less from the Unix side of the house twords 
    OpenVMS and WNT.
    
    Jokes hide a veiled attitude twords our products and in the Digital
    notesfile it's inappropriate to make snide comments about a product
    that produces a yearly 6-7 billion dollar yearly revenue stream for
    Digital.
    
    The "Joke" was in bad taste and requires that you rethink your position
    on posting such a joke in a Digital-wide notesfile.
    
    You want to make jokes... Do so at our competitor's expense, not 
    Digital's...
    
    JMHO
    
    John W.

>> VMS long term
    
  >  Isn't that an oxymoron?   :-)  :-)

Uh-oh!  Better watch out for John W coming through the wire!

See note 3860.82 -- food for thought for all of us.

			SQ

re: 3860.82

Very well said.

>> VMS long term
    
  >  Isn't that an oxymoron?   :-)  :-)
                                        
 >   You want to make jokes... Do so at our competitor's expense, not 
 >   Digital's...
 >   
 >   JMHO
 >   
 >   John W.
    
    AIX long term....
    
    ...isn't that an aixymoron?  :-) :-)

Re:
	Notefile: humane::digital
	Note: 3992.19
	Author: LEEL::LINDQUIST "Pluggin' prey"


Well said!

    At the risk of joining the religious wars, it is my understanding that 
    when customers go to R3, they generally do not buy all 71 modules, but
    integrate legacy code for some applications with the ABAP code in R3.
    Our migration service for VMS to UNIX lets them get these legacy
    applications up quick enough that they can generally pay for the port
    in the first year cost of ownership savings moving to Alpha. This does
    not preclude later re-engineering (or maybe RAD engagement to redo) the
    application once it is running on UNIX
    
    IBM has successfully used the same tool kit to steal major
    opportunities as accounts like DOW and Dupont. Because of archetectural
    similarities, we can prove that porting to Alpha is cheaper (e.g. no
    little Endian to Big Endian bugs to fix). In addition, our pricing on
    Sector7 tools is generally much cheaper than the sme thing from HP or
    IBM.
    
    If you have a customer where this service might fit, please call me
    (297-9451) or send me mail (Rick Pottinger @mro or USCTR1::POTTINGER)
    or see the marketing material in chgv04::sector7:
    

    Certainly, there are a number of customers who are working on UNIX
    migrations. Much money can be made helping them achieve their goals.
    
    In my particular case, I've got a supplier to a customer who's
    attempting to port their C/S middleware from VMS to UNIX. (The thing's
    huge... million lines of code.) Life could be better. They're under the
    gun to get it accomplished, but encounter all kinds of features--or
    bugs?--and have lost considerable time dealing with them. The customer
    has called on SI for assistance in the form of a UNIX internals wizard.
    
    Can't find one.
    
    I can get from one to three weeks of high-rate consulting work--with
    room for more--but cannot locate a good resource. (Two problems: the
    911 process appears to be less than effective and SI is short on UNIX
    heavies.)
    
    If any wizards out there have the desire to visit Dallas, TX for a
    while, please call me (Paul Nittel, DTN 445-7223).
    
    

Dallas in summertime?  That could explain the lack of success...

re: .23

Hey, it's only going to be 102 today.  What's the problem?

Bob

    Ah'm thinkin' about addin' air conditionin' to the truck this year...if
    it gets warmer. :^]
    
    								Tex

    ...makes lightin' a cigarette a breeze. Just hold it up in the
    sunlight. So, what's the problem ?
    

             <<< Note 3992.19 by LEEL::LINDQUIST "Pluggin' prey" >>>

>>    <<< Note 3992.15 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
>>                     -< Jokes have a cumulative effect... >-
>>    
>>    The Joke is not funny.
    
>    I thought it was funny.   
    
    One Small man's opinion...
    
    
    >Go ahead and fire me.  I dare you.
    >I double dare you.
    
    Grow up.  People aren't disiplined for making bad jokes about our 
    product lines in this company (in an all Digital forum).  Now post 
    a bad joke about women, minorities, or a Vice-President if you're 
    such a man who throws caution to the wind;-)
    
    
    
    
>>    The "Joke" was in bad taste and requires that you rethink your position
>>    on posting such a joke in a Digital-wide notesfile.
  
    >I'm really tired of the thought police telling people what to
    >think.   Maybe if you added a few 'in my opinion's to your
    >reply, I'd value your note.   
    
    Everything in this notesfile is the authors "Opinion" except for some
    extracts from VTX...
    
    I'm really tired of hearing the squablings of the type you foster
    when the "Cute" little joke.  
    
    I responded to your "Joke" because I percieve a real problem among 
    Digital rank and file:  Not being able to say something nice about 
    all of our products or not being able to just let it pass.
    
    As Mom used to say:  If you can't say anything nice... Don't say
    anything at all.

    
    
    
>    Maybe a 'vms is great' chapter should be added to the valuing
>    diversity party handbook.  Maybe we can just add 'open' to
>    all product names! Maybe a few pep rally songs that we can
>    sing (what rhymes with open?).   

     Sounds like you have an AX to grind... Grind it at home we're 
    trying to save a 12 billion dollar a year business Called 
    Digital -- Get it??
    
    
(((cheap song deleted)))
    
    
>    All you've said is that vms provides a revenue stream. 
>    You've said nothing that refutes the supposed claim that vms
>    isn't long term.

    The OpenVMS revenue stream was a touch stone to the fact that
    we (despite crys that OpenVMS is dying for years) continue to 
    sell more and more of it each and every year.. and not just into our 
    installed base.
    
    
>    Instead of pontificating, why don't you offer some facts
>    about why vms is long term?  That way, if someone reading
>    this gets asked this question by a customer, their answer
>    won't have to be "vms is long term, because digital really
>    needs the cash".

    My information in this thread was for a Digital audiance, many who 
    are unaware of the sheer amount of dollars that OpenVMS brings 
    into Digital.  That information would not be a good reason to 
    convice customers(it's considered bad form in sales to inform 
    customers how much money you made off them last time I checked)... 
    OpenVMS revenue information should be a good reason to convince 
    Digital employees that continuing to sell OpenVMS is an important
    part of the company today and in the future...  (I'm sorry I should
    have spelled that out for you previously)
    
    If a customer askes a question on our Operating Systems and 
    their strategy if you're not able to respond intelligently
    ask the question of the OpenVMS or Unix Partner or local WNT Wizard
    in your geography.  They should be able to answer the question
    correctly and without damaging the reputation of the other products.
    
    (Note that we are professionals in the field -- well equipt to deal
    with this type of customer question.  You non-professionals are warned
    not to try this at home...:-))
    
    If you want OpenVMS information, any of the OpenVMS notesfiles should
    be able to help you out.
    
    But as an example of a pro-OpenVMS fact (that you demanded here) 
    I'll begin a lesson.
    
    BEGIN LECTURE
    
    Fact One:
    
    One reason OpenVMS has long term viablity because (according to the most
    recent Gartner report July 5th 1995 KA-210-1646) on High-Availability
    Trends and Vendor Positioning, OpenVMS Ranked not only highest
    (against Tandum, IBM MVS/AIX/OS400, HPUX, DG, AT&T and BULL) but had 
    the best price/performance.
    
    Customers who are implementing a 24x7x365 operation should consider
    OpenVMS for the best scalablity, reliablity, and On-Line/Continuous
    operation as it has the absolutely highest rated Cluster and
    availablity technology in the industry today.
    
    When we can do something that no other Vendor in the industry can 
    do, when our product set with OpenVMS is that Unique, OpenVMS becomes
    a long-term, unique product to the entire industry that Digital can
    continue to sell -- at a profit.
    
    If we can make a very good return on investment on a unique product 
    that's better than all of our competitors in the marketplace it would 
    be foolish to throw the product out. 
    
    
    END LECTURE
    
    There... Did I say anything Bad about our Unix offerings? No.. just
    Ranked on the competition... 
    
    
    
>    But, you never know, the blind loyalty you propose might
>    work...

    I do have blind loyalty ... to my current product line; OpenVMS, Digital
    Unix and WNT.  We're fighting our competitors in the Industry not 
    fighting ourselves...  I'm willing to let the market decide OpenVMS's
    Digital-Unix, WNT, and Alpha's fate are you?
    
    OpenVMS, Digital-Unix and WNT are not a zero-sum game for Digital, we 
    can and must grow all three to survive.  Making fun, or taking jabs at
    any of our product lines is counter productive -- Our competitors and 
    use such indiscretions to show our lack of commitment, or how they are
    so much more focused then Digital is.  
    
    That slows down the sales process tremendously as we have to educate 
    and re-educate customers and potential customers who have a wave of 
    "Cute" sound-bytes (I.E. VMS is dead, Digital called Unix Snake Oil, 
    WNT on Alpha isn't WNT)  to overcome about our strategy and commitments.
    
    You got jokes about OpenVMS, WNT, or Digital-Unix -- Keep them to
    yourself... or write them on the bathroom wall... Just don't post them
    in a public notesfile.
    
    JMHO
    
    John Wisniewski
    
    
    

    re -1
    
    	Do you ever interact with customers?  The competition?  Trust me,
    the joke is on you.  It isn't the little guy in this company that
    deep-sixed VMS, but rather inept management of one of our 'core'
    businesses.  Unfortunately, we have believed everyone else's hype
    (VMS is dead, Unix is 'open', etc) instead of creating our own.  No
    customer out there comes up to us and says "Hey I hear even Digital
    employees make fun of VMS", but rather, "Why are you guys killing this,
    it is a great product..."
    
    Brad.

>                              <<< Note 3992.27 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
>                                        -< The Time for Jokes at our expense has passed... >-
>
>    
>
>    My information in this thread was for a Digital audiance, many who 
>    are unaware of the sheer amount of dollars that OpenVMS brings 
>    into Digital.  That information would not be a good reason to 
    Gee, I don't come to work assuming all my co-workers are
    idiots.  It's too bad that you do.

>    
>    If a customer askes a question on our Operating Systems and 
>    their strategy if you're not able to respond intelligently
>    ask the question of the OpenVMS or Unix Partner or local WNT Wizard
>    in your geography.  They should be able to answer the question
>    correctly and without damaging the reputation of the other products.

    So, basically, YOU don't have an answer.  

    Instead of trying to educate the digital audience about some
    self-obvious truth, like vms generates revenue, why don't you
    answer the real question -- why vms is long term?

    This would be much more useful knowlege for most employees,
    if you're as altrustic as you claim.

    BTW, the original joke wasn't nearly as funny as your reply. 

RE: .29

>    Gee, I don't come to work assuming all my co-workers are
>    idiots.  It's too bad that you do.

Neither John nor myself assume that all our co-workers are idiots.  On the
contrary, both he and I believe that the percentage of dedicated, competent
and capable people in Digital is actually higher now than it was in the past,
when we hired many people and never got rid of *anybody*.

Now, all (and I include myself and John in this) people everywhere are very
well informed about some things, and very poorly informed about other things.
John always tries to educate and inform people, to give them more information
than they had, and to supply them with data that they may not have had, in
order to allow them to see why he holds the opinions that he does.  Some
people in Digital are still not aware (as in, not informed in this area) that
the vast bulk of Digital's revenue comes from OpenVMS.  This does not mean
they are idiots, it means that their job does not cause them to come into
contact with this information.

It seems to me that your ad-hominem attack on John shows more of your attitude
than his.

>    Instead of trying to educate the digital audience about some
>    self-obvious truth, like vms generates revenue, why don't you
>    answer the real question -- why vms is long term?
>
>    This would be much more useful knowlege for most employees,
>    if you're as altrustic as you claim.

And why don't you try and word your replies in a less confrontational way?

But to answer your question (why OpenVMS is long term), there is really only
one fundamental answer.  This answer sounds generic, in that the answer will
apply to *any* product that is truly a long term product.  The answer is that
OpenVMS satisfies a certain set of business needs better than anything else 
in the market, and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.  

Note that this is true of Digital UNIX, Microsoft Windows, Windows NT, HP 
LaserJets, Sony monitors, Ford Taurus, Brooks Brothers suits for men, Rolex
watches, Lear Jet aircraft, etc, etc.  In all cases there is a certain set
of customers who want that product because it satisfies their business needs
and requirements better than anything else, so the product is assured of a
large number of customers for the forseeable future.

The partial set of features that OpenVMS offers includes reliability, security,
expandability, speed, ease of development, and many 3rd party products.  Note
that some of these features (specifically speed and 3rd party products) are
also true for both Digital UNIX and Windows NT, but they add other capabilities
which are unique to them, which make them long term Digital products.

I still cannot get over this debate inside Digital, which goes on forever.  
If we were Ford Motor Company, any employee who worked on the Taurus (Ford's 
entry in the car market) would never *dream* of criticizing the AeroStar 
(Ford's entry in the mini-van market) or the Explorer (Ford's entry in the 
truck market).  They understand that anytime a customer buys any Ford, they 
win.  They understand that they need to save their energy in taking business 
away from Chevrolet/Toyota/BMW/etc, not in inter-nicene warfare on their own 
company.  They understand that attacking another product of their own company 
is foolish at best and dis-loyal at worst.

I only wish that all Digital employees understood the same thing.

-- Ken Moreau

> <<< Note 3992.30 by ODIXIE::MOREAU "Ken Moreau;Sales Support;South FL" >>>
>

>
>And why don't you try and word your replies in a less confrontational way?

    After this:

       |>>    <<< Note 3992.15 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
       |>>                     -< Jokes have a cumulative effect... >-
       |>>    
       |>>    The Joke is not funny.
       |	    
       |>    I thought it was funny.   
       |	    
       |    One Small man's opinion...

    ...why would I?   I thought it was damn polite of me to not
    respond in kind.

    This, fter John wrote that his mother told him not to say
    anything, if he couldn't say anything nice.   I'm really hurt.

    re: .30 by Ken Moreau ...
    
    An excellent answer Ken, I'm keeping an extract of it because it is
    concise and really gets the point across. It really underscores the
    fact that Digital is a business, and we as Digits need to focus on
    our business, not on technocratic quibbles.
    
    Many of the other notes in this topic demonstrate to me how far many
    people in this company have forgotten we are a *business*. These notes
    are a form of business communications; yet they are filled with non-
    business and non-professional vitriol. I would be ashamed to see this
    stuff in a business letter with our letterhead on it. Why does anyone
    think that it's okay, just because it's on a terminal instead?
    
    Geoff

    <<< I would be ashamed to see this stuff in a business letter with 
    <<< our letterhead on it. Why does anyone think that it's okay, 
    <<< just because it's on a terminal instead?
    
     Just goes to show that we 
    1) really have not gotten the message out to everyone in digital about
       our business.
    2) still hire or employee short-sighted ill-informed people.
    
    -Mike Z.
    

>                                               <<< Note 3992.32 by ZPOVC::GEOFFREY >>>
>                                                -< Understanding our business ... >-
>    
>    Many of the other notes in this topic demonstrate to me how far many
>    people in this company have forgotten we are a *business*. These notes
>    are a form of business communications; yet they are filled with non-
>    business and non-professional vitriol. I would be ashamed to see this
>    stuff in a business letter with our letterhead on it. Why does anyone
>    think that it's okay, just because it's on a terminal instead?
    Um...because it's internal?

    Who has suggested that the contents of notes be put on
    letterhead and sent to customers?

    If folks want to express opinions about digital in notes, at
    the lunch table in the cafeteria, or in similar non-customer
    forums, I think it's fine.   Even if they're negative
    opinions.   It's far better that people have a place to
    vent these feelings.

    If the guy who had the oxymoron comment about vms is always
    professional in front of customers, that's good enough for
    me.

    There seem to be a number of people here saying that only
    good things about digital should be written here.  That's
    what I find a little silly.

    Of course, in the finest notes tradition, you're free to
    start your own conference, where only good-news about digital
    notes are allowed.  You could model it after the CHRISTIAN
    conference...

    Seems warmer in this notes file than it is outside. Maybe it's time to
    use up some vacation time folks.
    
    r
    

    >Who has suggested that the contents of notes be put on
    >letterhead and sent to customers?

    Business correspondence is not limited to our customers. Internal
    correspondence existed long before Notes did, and most employees expect
    a certain level of civility and polity in anything that is written on
    paper. Why shouldn't we expect it via electronic communication?
    
    >If folks want to express opinions about digital in notes, at
    >the lunch table in the cafeteria, or in similar non-customer
    >forums, I think it's fine.   Even if they're negative
    >opinions.   It's far better that people have a place to
    >vent these feelings.
    
    I guess I draw a distinction regarding social conversation between
    friends and aquaintances at a lunchtable. You're dealing with a
    limited audience who participate by mutual consent. Even so, it's
    highly unlikely you would address someone at the table in an
    antagonistic or confrontational sort of way if you did not have
    some personal relationship already established.
    
    Notes files are a forum with wide visibility, and there's usually not
    much in the way of personal contact between Noters. You can't treat it
    like a personal conversation between two people.
    
    Geoff
    

>    I guess I draw a distinction regarding social conversation between
>    friends and aquaintances at a lunchtable. You're dealing with a
>    limited audience who participate by mutual consent. Even so, it's
>    highly unlikely you would address someone at the table in an
>    antagonistic or confrontational sort of way if you did not have
>    some personal relationship already established.

I suspect history is relevant here.  Here's a hypothesis: those that
have been here forever have used Notes since shortly after Len Kawell's
teach-himself-PL/I project escaped into the Engineering Network, which
sort of just grew out of some unofficial connections on ML 5-5.

In other words, in the early days this wasn't "official" anything, it
just grew out of the efforts of diverse engineers.

Consequently, we (and I regard myself as one of the early users, although
I didn't contribute to any of the above) think of this as the big
electronic water-cooler.  I write things in here with about the same 
reflection (you have been warned :-) as I might utter things at said
metaphorical water-cooler.  I treat things I read in here in about the
same way.  I don't get offended at other hot-heads.  All this is coloured
by how I perceive the medium, not by any corporate dictates.

Those of you (whoops, 'us' and 'them'? I didn't mean to be antagonistic)
seem to perceive Notes solely as a corporate tool provided by DEC.  Something
like the interoffice mail system, perhaps.  Sure, at one level it is just
another business tool, but that doesn't make me treat it that way.
(On the other hand, I do adhere to the Lionel (?) doctrine, which says
 that you shouldn't write anything that you'd not want to see attached
 to your resume).

    "Electronic water cooler".  I *like* that!  That exactly sums up the
    Digital conference, as a whole.  We have other conferences that are
    work-related, thus the tone is different.  These would be "Electronic
    Meetings", with a completely different set of implied guidelines.
    
    Porter's right, there ain't nothin' sacred about Notes and they should
    be compared to the corresponding face-to-face forums.  The only big
    difference is I don't have to shave. :^]
    
    							Tex

>    Porter's right, there ain't nothin' sacred about Notes and they should
>    be compared to the corresponding face-to-face forums.  The only big
>    difference is I don't have to shave. :^]

	Video is coming...  

	(which means that, on the Internet, they *will* know 
	 you're a dog)

	(I stole that from a talk by Gordon Bell; don't know if
	 it was original with him)

"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" comes from a cartoon in the
New Yorker magazine.

				Steve

> "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog" comes from a cartoon in the
> New Yorker magazine.

	Yes, but the modification that now they *will* know you're
	a dog is what I was talking about.  I lifted that from a 
	recent online talk (I was reading it, but it's available
	in RealAudio format) by Bell.

    >                 <<< Note 3992.28 by NCMAIL::SMITHB >>>

    >re -1
    
    >	Do you ever interact with customers?  The competition?  Trust me,
    >the joke is on you.  
    
    Every day... I'm a sales support specialist in Dallas Texas calling 
    on ABU and SBU accounts, I work with DECUS and the DFWLUG representing
    400+ customers in North Texas/Oklahoma... Yes I interact with Digital
    Customers and Potential Digital Customers.
    
    
    
    
    >It isn't the little guy in this company that
    >deep-sixed VMS, but rather inept management of one of our 'core'
    >businesses.  
    
    I refuse to acknowledge that OpenVMS has been "DEEP-Sixed" by 
    anyone at Digital.  We have a large installed base with OpenVMS
    and we are still selling and making a majority of Digital's revenues
    from the product...
    
    >Unfortunately, we have believed everyone else's hype
    >(VMS is dead, Unix is 'open', etc) instead of creating our own.  No
    >customer out there comes up to us and says "Hey I hear even Digital
    >employees make fun of VMS", but rather, "Why are you guys killing this,
    >it is a great product..."
    
    You create your own "HYPE" in the marketplace one customer and one 
    day at a time.  The Internal Mood a company has does get back to 
    customers and has to be "Fixed" to continue the selling process.
    
    You shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you... OpenVMS feeds most 
    of us today and pays for the R&D dollars for our other initiatives 
    in the marketplace.
    
    >Brad.
    
    John W.
    

>                     <<< Note 3992.29 by RTL::LINDQUIST >>>

>>                              <<< Note 3992.27 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
>>                                        -< The Time for Jokes at our expense has passed... >-
>>
>>    
>>
>>    My information in this thread was for a Digital audiance, many who 
>>    are unaware of the sheer amount of dollars that OpenVMS brings 
>>    into Digital.  That information would not be a good reason to 
    
 >   Gee, I don't come to work assuming all my co-workers are
 >   idiots.  It's too bad that you do.

    I don't assume that my co-workers are idiots, but many people who 
    are not in Sales or Sales Support take a very narrow view of the
    world and what pays the bills.  
    
    If you are fully informed my appologies, but there are others 
    in our corporation that do not always understand where our revenues
    come from.
    
    
>>    
>>    If a customer askes a question on our Operating Systems and 
>>    their strategy if you're not able to respond intelligently
>>    ask the question of the OpenVMS or Unix Partner or local WNT Wizard
>>    in your geography.  They should be able to answer the question
>>    correctly and without damaging the reputation of the other products.

 >   So, basically, YOU don't have an answer.  

    * You Didin't read my answer... You extractd part of this from my 
      message without reading the summary of the Gartner Group report 
      on OpenVMS's highest rating in the Industry?
    
    I am the OpenVMS partner for my geography and I sit next to the UNIX
    Partner and the WNT Wizard for our area.  Any of us can answer these
    questions -- Officially, to customers for Digital Equipment.
    
    I was pointing out to folks reading this notesfile that if they
    need this type of positioning they can contact these specialists.
    
    This is what's known as adding value by providing information
    
    
    
    
    >Instead of trying to educate the digital audience about some
    >self-obvious truth, like vms generates revenue, why don't you
    >answer the real question -- why vms is long term?

    I provided you with one (of many) reasons with the Gartner Group 
    factoid but you didn't read it...
    
    >This would be much more useful knowlege for most employees,
    >if you're as altrustic as you claim.

    We have to get away from the "UNDERSTOOD" position that OpenVMS
    is bad, dying or worse.  WNT and Digital-Unix are good products 
    and have Digital's attention right now, we don't need to write
    off OpenVMS -- all of these products compete in different markets
    with overlap in functionality going to the cheapest solution. 
    
    Altruistic yes... I try to be... for the good of Digital....
    
    
    >BTW, the original joke wasn't nearly as funny as your reply. 

    Glad you were amused... Although that wasn't the intent.
    

    <<< Note 3992.34 by LEEL::LINDQUIST "Lies, damn lies and management" >>>

>    There seem to be a number of people here saying that only
>    good things about digital should be written here.  That's
>    what I find a little silly.

     No.. but sniping, and saying unsubstantiated about OpenVMS,
    WNT, Or Digital-Unix adds no value to the discourse and only
    increases the misery.
    
    You want to complain about something that wrong with OpenVMS...
    Go right ahead but I nor the entire corporation can fix comments
    like "OpenVMS = an Oxymoron"
    
    There's nothing here except a cheap shot, and I for one am tired
    of cheap shots at something that represents over 2/3rds of Digital's
    revenues.
    
    I expect cheap shots from our competitors, I don't expect Digital 
    employees to be writing their material for them.
    
    John W.
    

>    There's nothing here except a cheap shot, and I for one am tired
>   of cheap shots at something that represents over 2/3rds of Digital's
>   revenues.
    
John, if you don't stop harping about VMS paying the bills, I am personally
going to come over the wires for you :-)

Face it, Digital's fixation on OpenVMS is responsible for:

- Digital being stuck in neutral instead of being a $40B company.  HP was
  about a $8B company when we first reached our plateau of $13B.  Now they
  are more than twice our size!

- 87% of my fellow employees at my site being laid off in the past 3 years!

- Stockholder equity being trashed

I'll be the first to say that OpenVMS was the reason for Digital's success
in the 80's, and for its achieving the $13B plateau.  But I'll also be the
first to say, that OpenVMS fixation is a major reason for Digital's faltering
and losing the #2 computer company ranking in the 90s.

Ram

>I'll be the first to say that OpenVMS was the reason for Digital's success
>in the 80's, and for its achieving the $13B plateau.  But I'll also be the
>first to say, that OpenVMS fixation is a major reason for Digital's faltering
>and losing the #2 computer company ranking in the 90s.

	So, Ram, are you saying that we should now be "fixated" on UNIX?  I 
can't find anything in John's notes that indicate he is "fixated" on OpenVMs. 
Go back and reread them.  John is saying we sell and support several Operating 
Systems now -- and that bashing any of them is short-sighted.  FWIW, I agree.

			SQ

Replies .45 and .49 hidden as they cross over the line into "personal attack"
territory.

				Steve

>	So, Ram, are you saying that we should now be "fixated" on UNIX?  I 
> can't find anything in John's notes that indicate he is "fixated" on OpenVMs. 
> Go back and reread them.  John is saying we sell and support several Operating 
> Systems now -- and that bashing any of them is short-sighted.  FWIW, I agree.

SQ, please reread .47.  The word UNIX is NOT mentioned once!  I agree with
John in regards to selling customers what they need, and finally in the
mid 90s we are doing just that as a company.  Had we got that into our heads
4-5 years sooner we would be a $40B company today.

My point of disagreement with John is simply in regards to the worship he
demands of OpenVMS.  I refuse to genuflect before an idol whose worship
has brought this company to the brink of bankruptcy!

Ram

    i normally don't wade into axe grindings, and may regret this, but ...
    
    to blame VMS or <full in favorite axe> for the downturn at digital is
    to completely oversimplify things and to regress into "vilification". 
    there are lots of things that were "wrong".
    
    i see lots of customers.  some swear by VMS.  some swear by UNIX.  some
    swear *at* them.  customer A's affection for VMS does not diminish B's
    affection for UNIX, or vice versa.
    
    back to ROM ...

  
>SQ, please reread .47.  The word UNIX is NOT mentioned once!  I agree with
>John in regards to selling customers what they need, and finally in the
>mid 90s we are doing just that as a company.  Had we got that into our heads
>4-5 years sooner we would be a $40B company today.

    The mistakes that were made were Management mistakes, NOT to enter the 
    PC market, Not to Enter the Unix market, and not to pursue open
    commodity computing.  OpenVMS product management didn't make those 
    decisions they were too busy selling OpenVMS, Upper Management did...
    
    Had we expanded our product lines 5-8 years ago, Sun, Compaq and HP
    might not have had the leg-up in the marketplace they now enjoy.
    
    Had we, If we, ... all this is sunday morning quarterbacking right now.
    
    I don't want to be looking for a Job in 1999 interviewing and
    explaining how Digital could have been a contender like some punch
    drunk Marlin Brando...  I'm going to use every weapon at my disposal
    today.
    
    We sell OpenVMS, Digital Unix and WNT... We're the good guys, customers
    like our engineering, it (much more often then our competitors) works
    out of the box, first time, every time.  Sell it... and yeah, I believe
    that we blew a 40 billion dollar opportunity but I'm not ready to throw
    away our current 11-12 billion dollars each and every year on self
    recriminations...
    
>My point of disagreement with John is simply in regards to the worship he
>demands of OpenVMS.  I refuse to genuflect before an idol whose worship
>has brought this company to the brink of bankruptcy!

>Ram

I don't worship or demand worship of OpenVMS I only point out that it is a 
    large part of the reason Digital is still here and is able to branch 
    out into new and emerging markets.    
    
    
    OpenVMS didn't bring us to the verge of bankrupty, Managers did, 
    Bad Policy did; our OpenVMS customers and our current OpenVMS installed 
    base did not.
    
    My Bag says Digital, my Laptop is a Digital PC, my Internet Server is
    Digital, my mailnode and site servers are all Digital too, my paycheck 
    says Digital and any customer I help is a Digital customer.  OpenVMS,
    Digital-Unix and WNT are products I help to sell and support, but first
    I sell Digital, all of Digital because that's who pays my check...  
    
    Jokes and snide comments have a way of making themselves part of the
    common culture and becoming a self fulfilling prophecy.  That's why
    the joking has to stop... We have to stop tearing each other apart
    at our own expense...
    
    Let's destroy the competition first... then we can have another go
    at destroying ourselves;-)
    
    John Wisniewski
    
    
    

    If the only tool you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.
    
    								Tex

>SQ, please reread .47.  The word UNIX is NOT mentioned once!  I agree with

Sorry, Ram, but this thread keeps degenerating into VMS v UNIX.  If you sling 
arrows at VMS, some of us are going to assume you are "on the other side."  
That may be wrong, but that's how it's perceived.  What John and others keep
trying to get across is that choosing up sides and slinging mud is counter-
productive.

>My point of disagreement with John is simply in regards to the worship he
>demands of OpenVMS.  I refuse to genuflect before an idol whose worship

John isn't demanding the worship of VMS, just asking for some respect.

Your turn again.

			SQ

>                              <<< Note 3992.54 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
>                                       -< Come On... We're the Good Guys.. We're Digital... >-
>
>    Jokes and snide comments have a way of making themselves part of the
>    common culture and becoming a self fulfilling prophecy.  That's why
>    the joking has to stop... We have to stop tearing each other apart
>    at our own expense...

    I disagree.  I think humor is good.  I think you should get
    off your high-horse long enough to let comments like:
    	"long term vms -- isn't that an oxymoron"
    just pass.  Aren't there any more important issues, or more
    important forums where time defending digital and vms can be
    spent?

    I haven't posted any notes regarding the long term-ness of
    vms; my only point was I didn't like the high-handed bashing
    of the guy who made a one-line joke, and particularly the
    preachy tone -- you will not do this, etc.

    But since John has enlightened me, I'm worried.
    There are only two choices:
    	1) either a silly joke in an internal conference doesn't 
           matter 

    	2) a silly joke affects revenue.

    I must assume, based on the hundreds of lines that John has
    written that he believes #2.

    If #2 is true, then it's worse than anyone imagined. VMS must
    be in an incredibly precarious death spiral, if a silly one
    line joke has any affect on its revenue.

    I didn't realize things were this bad.  

    John, thanks for alerting me to the desperate situation vms
    is in.    

    It must be very hard for you to do your job as a vms partner,
    knowing just how precarious the future of vms is.

    
    >I disagree.  I think humor is good.  I think you should get
    >off your high-horse long enough to let comments like:
   > 	"long term vms -- isn't that an oxymoron"
   > just pass.  Aren't there any more important issues, or more
   > important forums where time defending digital and vms can be
   > spent?

    Postive humor, image enhancing humor is good.  The time for 
    product knocking humor is over.  
    
    A person has to draw the line somewhere in their world... 
    
    I've chosen mine here.
    
    
    >and particularly the preachy tone -- you will not do this, etc.

    I have not given any directive, I've mearly pointed out the
    destructive potental that a "JOKE" can have.  You can draw 
    your own conclusions...
    
>    	2) a silly joke affects revenue.

     If a silly joke/statement/belief is repeated enough, often enough, 
    with enough believablity it can change the course of history.  Hitler, 
    Stalin, and many others believed that controlling "the truth" was a very 
    important undertaking.
    
>    I must assume, based on the hundreds of lines that John has
>    written that he believes #2.

>    If #2 is true, then it's worse than anyone imagined. VMS must
>    be in an incredibly precarious death spiral, if a silly one
>    line joke has any affect on its revenue.

    Lee... You have the worst logic I've ever seen from a noter, your
    assumptions don't even relate to your concusions except as a 
    vindictive and personal attack against me.  You are so mired in 
    your right to your "expression of personal freedom" statements
    that you don't even realize that you're posting and reposting the 
    same material that started this discussion in the first place.
    
    No.. Maybe you do know and you're just posting the anti-OpenVMS 
    inflamatory messages to goad me.. I guess that's just the type 
    of person that you are...
    
    You can go yank on someone else's chain from now on...  
    
    If I've goaded you I appologize.  You may never understand this but 
    this wasn't just about OpenVMS it's about Digital people feeling a 
    need to make jokes that dennigrate anything that's successful at Digital.  
    
    
>    I didn't realize things were this bad.  

>    John, thanks for alerting me to the desperate situation vms
>    is in.    

>    It must be very hard for you to do your job as a vms partner,
>    knowing just how precarious the future of vms is.
    
    
    It's more difficult to do my job realizing that when I help close
    an OpenVMS,WNT and/or Digital-Unix sale part of profit goes to 
    pay some Digital employees who are so engrossed in their own private 
    agenda that the good of the company is a secondary consideration,
    and something only pay lipservice to.
    
    Have a nice Day Lee.
    
     
    John Wisniewski

>        <<< Note 3992.47 by INDYX::ram "Ram Rao, SPARCosaurus hunter" >>>
>               -< One company, one architecture => current mess >-

>Face it, Digital's fixation on OpenVMS is responsible for:
>
>- Digital being stuck in neutral instead of being a $40B company.  HP was
>  about a $8B company when we first reached our plateau of $13B.  Now they
>  are more than twice our size!
>
>- 87% of my fellow employees at my site being laid off in the past 3 years!
>
>- Stockholder equity being trashed

    From where I stood it was not fixation on VMS that caused these things.
    The problem was that we stopped building decent hardware for
    VMS or UNIX.  HP, SUN, etc. moved right in on our hardware market.
    Our VAX hardware was an embarrasment and our MIPS products
    never deserved to be taken seriously (although they beat anything
    else we had). We opened the door for all the ISVs to look elsewhere.
    Now we cant get them to look back.
    bob
    

>                              <<< Note 3992.58 by DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI "ADEPT of the Virtual Space." >>>
>                                     -< Don't you think you might ought to rephrase that lad? >-


>    If I've goaded you I appologize.  You may never understand this but 
>    this wasn't just about OpenVMS it's about Digital people feeling a 
>    need to make jokes that dennigrate anything that's successful at Digital.  
>    
    What do you think your repeatedly referring to  'a small man's
    opinion' is, a high compliment?    

>    It's more difficult to do my job realizing that when I help close
>    an OpenVMS,WNT and/or Digital-Unix sale part of profit goes to 
>    pay some Digital employees who are so engrossed in their own private 
>    agenda that the good of the company is a secondary consideration,
>    and something only pay lipservice to.

    If you're so sorry for goading me, why this last paragraph?

    Near as I can figger out, the only result of this pissin' match is
    everyone's gettin' all wet.

>>    If I've goaded you I appologize.  
 
 >   What do you think your repeatedly referring to  'a small man's
 >   opinion' is, a high compliment?    

     Gosh No!
    
>>    It's more difficult to do my job realizing that when I help close
>>    an OpenVMS,WNT and/or Digital-Unix sale part of profit goes to 
>>    pay some Digital employees who are so engrossed in their own private 
>>    agenda that the good of the company is a secondary consideration,
>>    and something only pay lipservice to.

  >    If you're so sorry for goading me, why this last paragraph?

    Was this last paragraph refering to you?  I'm sorry if you took 
    it to be. 
    
    Something must have made me cross to the point of distraction.
    
    
    John Wisniewski
    
      

    

	I just finished reading EE Times latest "World Wide" salary and
opinion survey. A series of questions were ask on what OSs and Languages
were in use now and which ones the respondents expected to be using in two
years. Below are the results. Draw your own conclusions..

	OS/Language	Today      Two years Hence

	DOS		81%		36.4%
	C, C++		75		64
	Windows 3.x	77		37.6
	Unix		58		47.5
	Assembly	47		28
    Real-time Kernels	25		25
	Macintosh	19		12.3
	Windows/NT	15.5		34
	Fortran		9.9		5.2
	Windows 95	9.2		58.4
	Ada		9.2		8.7
	OS/2		3.1		2.6
	Basic/Visual	2.9		1.4
	Pascal		1.4		0.5
	VMS		0.9		0.2

	Notes: survey sent out to 3000 randomly selected readers, EEs or
managers, 952 responses were returned. Of these 536 were Japanese, readers
of EE Times sister pulication, Nikkei Electronics. 

So *all* programming language use is heading down?

Or is it simply that everyone expects to be using something
not on the list? (I vote for Snobol4)

> So *all* programming language use is heading down?

Could well be - maybe they expect to be able to buy packages/components
to do what they need done, so they don't need to write code...

>  <<< Note 3992.65 by MU::porter "flap A from slot B/slapping in the wind" >>>
>
>So *all* programming language use is heading down?
>
>Or is it simply that everyone expects to be using something
>not on the list? (I vote for Snobol4)
    
    Nah, it doesn't have a chance in ... well, you get the idea.

    Do Snobol users have our phone number?? :-)
    

    Yes, unfortunately their rotary dial phones can't press #2 to talk to a
    sales rep, #3 for support, ....

    They don't need a rotary phone - they'll define a 47-line pattern to
    match against all the files on gatekeeper to filter out the ones they
    want.
    
    I miss SNOBOL4 (the SPITBOL variant)
    
    					Steve

	"odd" languages I fondly remember, now "in the museum":
		LISP in 80k on TOPS-10
		WATFOR on punch cards on Unisys 90/60 (yuk!)
		FOCAL (single letter ops!)
		MACRO-8
	there are tons of others but these days excessive C++ clouds
	my brain ;-)

	_kelley

    At the risk of re-starting this rat hole...
    
    Fifteen to twenty years ago you probably wouldn't find a college or
    university without PDP-8's or PDP-11's as part of the course material
    for computer science departments. When these people went into the
    working world and their bosses asked them to do their thing they said
    "I can do it if you get me a ..." (insert product here).
    
    Then came the MVII and it would fit in a college lab budget and more of
    the same took place.
    
    The world beat a path to our door...and we got fat (corporately).
    
    Startup competitors realized that we (and others) had such huge margins
    that they could build "boxes" with off the shelf parts for less, sell
    for less and still make a profit. The only hook was that they didn't
    have an OS. To make one would cost a bundle and a customer wouldn't bet
    his business on something unproven with a startup company (viability in
    question). Enter Unix. For a few bucks a startup can have a "known" OS
    that they can sell to their customers with "...don't worry - if we do
    go belly up your investment in Unix is portable!". [Snakeoil?!?]
    
    Then came the PC and it became the learning system (along with these
    Unix products) of choice.
    More graduates - what do they tell their bosses to buy?
    
    Meanwhile (late '80's) the marketing types are trying to squeeze the
    product for all the revenue it will generate (due to declining profits)
    and holding back on performance - just when RISC and Unix are coming
    into their own. Oooops!
    
    I think it has been said before that the first pass Nvax ran at 10nS.
    We milked it for years.
    
    We saddled the VAX4000 with a DSSI (aka SCSI with extensions) and
    didn't try to lead into a fast or wide offering.
    
    Don't blame VMS.
    
    Rob Wall
    [Here's where Atlant get's to tell me that I'm talking through my
    hat...and he does it so nicely too!]
    
    
    
    

RE: VMS vs UNIX, or why can't we sell both of them?

I was browsing the HP home page on the WWW just now (I really do have to get a
life), and blundered across the attached paper, entitled MPE vs UNIX.  For
those who don't know, HP offers 2 operating systems: HP-UX (their version of
UNIX) and MPE (a completely proprietary operating system onto which they have
added some "open" interfaces like POSIX).  To me these are very analogous to
Digital's offering Digital UNIX and OpenVMS.  They even market them in the 
same way we do, as a UNIX system and a production enterprise class system.

But there the similarities end.  This paper *trashes* UNIX.  Some comments
include:

     The UNIX shell programming language is powerful, but complex and
     confusing. Mistakes are easy to make, and operator errors can be
     devastating.

     The lack of a standard transaction management scheme in the UNIX
     operating system means that recovery from power failures, operator
     errors and application problems can be time consuming and costly.

     The standard UNIX tool for doing backups (tar) is inadequate for large
     commercial applications. It is slow, and backups cannot span more than
     one reel of tape. Commercial backup functionality requires an add-on

                       In July of 1994, HP surveyed 111 customers that use
     both HP 3000s and similar UNIX systems. Seventy-nine percent of those
     surveyed found the HP 3000 to be "more reliable" or "much more reliable"
     than the equivalent UNIX system.

            Other versions of UNIX may have no file system protection at all,
     in which case error recovery requires the use of file system checking
     utilities like "fsck", which can take hours on a large system.

HP is praising one of it's systems to that customer segment, without worrying
about how that praise affects another of it's products to a different market
segment.  In other words, they are doing the best job of marketing every 
product they have.

Tell me, what does HP know about marketing it's systems that we don't?  

-- Ken Moreau

P.S. I don't see a problem with copying this white paper, it was up on their
     WWW server for anyone to view.

Full white paper follows (warning, it is long).


[HP Computing Directory]

 [HP 3000 Servers]   MPE/iX vs. UNIX(R): A Brief Comparison

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quick Scroll to:

   * Introduction
   * Cost Comparison
   * System Management Functionality
   * Frequently Asked Questions about MPE/iX and UNIX:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction

Both UNIX and MPE offer the flexibility of open systems interfaces.
However, the HP 3000 offers many characteristics that make it uniquely
suitable to a mission critical, transaction processing environment. There
are three value propositions that differentiate the HP 3000 from other
platforms:

   * Ease of Operation
     The HP 3000 is uniquely easy for your operations staff to manage. In
     many instances, the system protects itself from operator errors,
     resulting in better uptime and higher productivity.

   * High Degree of Integration
     The software and hardware components of the HP 3000 are tested at
     Hewlett-Packard's Commercial Systems lab, to ensure that they work
     well together. There is little need for the system administrator to
     integrate system management tools that may come from multiple vendors.
     Special attention is given to testing error recovery, to ensure that
     when things go wrong, the HP 3000 can be brought back online quickly.

   * Superior Data Availability
     The HP 3000 was designed for mission critical transaction processing.
     MPE/iX's integrated transaction management system provides quick and
     automatic recovery from errors, ensuring the integrity of the entire
     system, including the file system and databases.

Some Examples:

Ease of Operations

MPE/iX
     MPE/iX's command language is easy to learn and use. The system
     protects itself from user and operator errors. For example, an
     operator request to purge system files will generally be ignored.
UNIX
     The UNIX shell programming language is powerful, but complex and
     confusing. Mistakes are easy to make, and operator errors can be
     devastating.

High Degree of Integration

MPE/iX
     Most system software comes from a single vendor (HP). Therefore,
     system components such as management tools, DBMSs, networks, print
     managers, and development tools are tightly integrated by HP. Customer
     integration costs are kept low.
UNIX
     Wide use of third party software for system administration and data
     base management means the system administrator must integrate these
     products. This is difficult and expensive, and errors can be very
     costly.

Superior Data Availability

MPE/iX
     MPE/iX was engineered to minimize system aborts and other
     interruptions in service. Furthermore, MPE/iX's integrated transaction
     management ensures that when failures do occur, recovery can be
     completed quickly.
UNIX
     The lack of a standard transaction management scheme in the UNIX
     operating system means that recovery from power failures, operator
     errors and application problems can be time consuming and costly.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cost Comparison

Some companies are attracted to a UNIX strategy because of a perception
that UNIX systems are cheaper than proprietary systems. While it is true
that UNIX hardware is less expensive than HP 3000 hardware, the overall
cost of a UNIX system may be more expensive than the equivalent HP 3000
system.

The cost of a "bare-bones" UNIX system (just the hardware and operating
system software) is considerably cheaper than the cost of a similar HP
3000. But it is a mistake to compare the HP 3000 to a "bare-bones" UNIX
system. There is a good deal of system management functionality that is
bundled with MPE/iX which is missing from UNIX.

From a system management perspective, you can make the UNIX system more
robust (and more expensive) by adding software products such as
OmniBack/UX, OpenSpool/UX and Sybase. These products raise the level of
functionality of the UNIX system above that of a "bare-bones" HP 3000.

Table 1 (below) shows the cost of two equivalent 64 user systems: an HP
3000 928, and a UNIX-based HP 9000 E25. The table also shows the cost of
three "add-on" software packages. To compensate for the fact that this
software actually makes the UNIX system slightly more robust than the
"bare-bones" HP 3000 shown, we've discounted them by 20%.

This table shows that the UNIX system, when loaded with add-on software to
bring it into functional parity with MPE/iX, is also at price parity with
the HP 3000.

Table 1. HP 3000 vs. HP 9000: Sample 64-user System

HP 3000                         HP 9000
__________________________      ____________________________

48 MHz Processor   $56,000      48 MHz Processor      $2,800

32MB memory        Incl.        32MB memory           $2,080

1 GB disk drive    Incl.        1 GB disk drive       $1,600

1 GB DDS DAT       Incl.        1 GB DDS DAT          $2,150

UPS                Incl.        UPS                     $749

Console            Incl.        Console                 $539

Factory Int.       Incl.        Factory Int.            $145

MPE/iX Operating   Incl.        HP-UX Operating      $10,495
System Software                 System Software
64 user license                 64 user license
_____________________________________________________________________

"Bare Bones" System => $56,000  "Bare Bones" System  =>       $20,558
_____________________________________________________________________

(No additional                  Add on software       $9,680
software required               for System Mgmt:
for system mgmt.)               o HP Openspool/UX
                                  and
                                o HP Omniback/UX
                                  (disc. by 20%)

IMAGE/SQL Database              Sybase(TM)           $27,102
Management Software             Database Management
                                Software (discounted
                                by 20%)
_____________________________________________________________________

Total Cost of       =>      $0  Total Cost of Add-on =>       $36,782
Add-on Software                 Software
_____________________________________________________________________

Total System Cost      $56,000  Total System Cost             $57,340
_____________________________________________________________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

System Management Functionality

System Management represents one of the "hidden costs" of open systems.
Ease of Management is one of the key strengths of the HP 3000 platform, and
MPE/iX comes bundled with a broad suite of system management tools and
capabilities that must be purchased separately for UNIX platforms. This
effectively lowers the overall cost of ownership of the HP 3000 platform.

Some Examples:

Print Management Error Recovery

MPE/iX
     If the paper jams in a printer, the MPE/iX integrated print manager
     (spooler) can back up a few pages and re-print any pages that may have
     been damaged in the jam.
     Benefit: Fast Error Recovery
UNIX
     The standard UNIX lp spooler cannot reprint damaged pages. Without an
     add-on print management tool such as HP's OpenSpool/UX the report must
     be re-printed from the beginning.
     Disadvantage: Time Consuming Recovery

Print Management Report Prioritization

MPE/iX
     If multiple reports are run at the same time, MPE/iX's integrated
     spooler can prioritize them, so urgently needed reports can be printed
     first
     Benefit: Responds to Business Requirements
UNIX
     The standard UNIX lp spooler cannot prioritize reports. Without an
     add-on print management tool such as HP's OpenSpool/UX, all reports
     are printed in a first-in, first-out sequence.
     Disadvantage: Inflexible - Technical Considerations take priority over
     Business Requirements

System Management: Backups

MPE/iX
     MPE/iX includes a utility (:STORE) for doing high-speed backups of the
     system. With add-on software (TurboSTORE/iX) backups can be done
     online, while users are logged on and entering transactions.
     Benefit: Minimal Downtime due to routine backups
UNIX
     The standard UNIX tool for doing backups (tar) is inadequate for large
     commercial applications. It is slow, and backups cannot span more than
     one reel of tape. Commercial backup functionality requires an add-on
     system management tool such as HP's Omniback/UX. Online backups may
     require duplicate disks (mirroring).
     Disadvantage: Without add-on software, system may be down for many
     hours for routine nightly backups.

System Management: Security

MPE/iX
     MPE/iX makes it possible for the operator to backup the system without
     the need for special system privileges (System Manager or "Superuser"
     capability).
     Benefit: System integrity cannot be jeopardized by operator errors.
UNIX
     The operator must have access to all data on the system in order to be
     able to perform backups. Without an add-on system management tool such
     as CA's Unicenter, this requires that the operator be granted
     "Superuser" capability.
     Disadvantage: "Superuser" operators can make errors that can
     jeopardize system integrity.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frequently Asked Questions about MPE/iX and UNIX

Superior Data Availability

How Does MPE/iX ensure a superior level of data availability?

One way is through MPE/iX's Integrated Transaction Management (XM) system.
This is software that ensures the integrity of the system in the face of
hardware breakdowns, software failures and other problems.

What does MPE/iX's XM system do?

It acts as a software "watchdog". When errors occur, it protects all
critical data, including user data and system data, from corruption. MPE/iX
protects data in files, as well as in IMAGE/SQL and ALLBASE databases.
Because of XM, the HP 3000 can recover from most errors quickly.

How is system data protected on UNIX systems?

On UNIX systems, system data is typically stored in the file system. Newer
versions of UNIX have a "journalled file system", which protects it from
errors. Other versions of UNIX may have no file system protection at all,
in which case error recovery requires the use of file system checking
utilities like "fsck", which can take hours on a large system.

How does this differ from MPE/iX's approach?

MPE/iX has a single transaction management system that automatically
recovers both the file system and the databases in the event of a failure.
Recovery usually takes a few minutes.

Aren't UNIX systems just as reliable as HP 3000s?

MPE/iX and its associated technologies were specifically designed for
high-end mission critical processing. The difference is clearly visible to
owners of HP systems. In July of 1994, HP surveyed 111 customers that use
both HP 3000s and similar UNIX systems. Seventy-nine percent of those
surveyed found the HP 3000 to be "more reliable" or "much more reliable"
than the equivalent UNIX system.

For mission critical environments, does the HP 3000 offer any technologies
that cannot be found on UNIX?

HP 3000 systems can be used to build a disaster-tolerant systems
environment. For example, SharePlex/iX is a product for dealing with
disasters such as an earthquake, fire, civil disturbance or other event
that could literally destroy the datacenter. In the event of a disaster,
SharePlex can quickly and easily shift all operations to a second site,
without any loss of data. This is a technology that is not available on any
UNIX-based platform today.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(R) UNIX is a registered trademark in the United States and other
countries, licensed exclusively through X/Open Company Limited.

Technical information in this document is subject to change without notice.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HP 3000 Servers

 [Top of Page]

Top | Quick Reference | Search | Up | Access HP

Contact webmaster@www.hp.com with questions or problems. (c) Copyright 1995
Hewlett-Packard Company.

Updated March 27, 1995

    Ken,
    
    I find this most interesting. Can you post a direct URL to this paper
    on HP's server?
    
    Guess what's going to show up in the hands of all of *my* customers
    that are considering HP-UX - heh heh heh

The way I found it was to go to HP's home page for products, at:

	http://www-dmo.external.hp.com:80/computing/main.html

and wandering down the MPE section.  But an easier way to locate something
specific is to use the SEARCH function on that page.  I just found it again
by entering MPE VS UNIX in the SEARCH function, and there it was:

	http://www-dmo.external.hp.com:80/csy/products/mpevsunix.html

Spread it far and wide...

-- Ken Moreau

This looks like the best place to put this.  Our customers are really 
wondering why Digital appears to be killing VMS.

Jilly

Article: 142763
From: wrath@cs.umbc.edu (Vijay Gill)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: VMS license: swindle
Date: 14 Mar 1996 12:13:17 -0500
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County
 
In article <4i8fov$1q7q@columba.udac.uu.se>,  <ruber@tsl.uu.se> wrote:
>
>
>	I was last Tuesday on a DEC presentation of their new AlphaStations.
>	They also put forward some nice offers on older AlphaStations which
>	were, as the salesmen called it, especially for us university 
>	customers. But they were only talking UNIX + NT. When asked for a
>	VMS license it became quiet for some time. Turned out that VMS was
>	not included any longer: it will cost us several thousands of Swedish
>	crowns more: enough to buy a nice hard disk instead.
 
 
I, for one, cannot see why Digital is insisting on driving VMS into
the ground.
 
Everytime I've called up Digital, asking for quotes on their
Alphastations, all I hear about it Windows NT and OSF/1. When asked
about VMS, phones go silent and I often hear "let me get back to you
on that."  Oh well.
 
 
 
 
 
-- 
Vijay Gill                         |The (paying) customer is always right.
wrath@cs.umbc.edu, vijay@umbc.edu  |                  - Piercarlo Grandi
http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~vijay      | Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get
These are my opinions only.        | sucked into jet engines.

VMS on the desktop is DEAD!  And Digital didn't kill it.  It was killed
by our third parties dropping support of their applications on OpenVMS
(e.g. Pro/Engineer, Unigraphics).  It just makes sense for Digital to
stop actively marketing it.  That does not mean stop selling it to
customers that still wan't to  pay good money for it.  Its just that
UNIX and NT get top billing on the workstation marketing literature.

Ram
(A sales support person who will gladly sell VMS workstations to
customers that need it).

    

How much extra money does it cost to put the word "OpenVMS" on a piece of paper?
Put OpenVMS, Digital Unix and Windows NT on the piece of paper in whatever order
you want.

If we sell it and it's supported, why not mention it?  The effect of not
mentioning OpenVMS has an impact beyond a simple omission for one product.  It
leaves the impression that OpenVMS is dying.

Paul

> It leaves the impression that OpenVMS is dying.

As I reasoned in .81, on the desktop OpenVMS is NOT dying. It is DEAD!

> As I reasoned in .81, on the desktop OpenVMS is NOT dying. It is DEAD!

You are not correct.

Paul

    	Ram, the units-sold numbers for Alpha for the last fiscal year
    which I just saw don't back up your statement either. We sell almost as
    many Alpha workstations running OpenVMS as we do running Digital
    Unix. Any Digital strategy which supports the notion of killing
    OpenVMS is a going-out-of-business strategy for the company. Many
    people would like to believe that our profits in other areas are
    sufficient to carry the company without the OpenVMS business, but
    it's a dream at this point. The profits just aren't there. At this
    particular time, kill OpenVMS, and you kill Digital.

Steve,

> No data to back up that statement

My job involves hourly interaction with customers. In the mid-western US,
OpenVMS workstations comprise < 10% of workstation sales.

> At this particular time, kill OpenVMS, and you kill Digital.

Nobody is trying to kill OpenVMS (in general) off.  However, I maintain
that the ISVs HAVE ALREADY KILLED OpenVMS on the desktop.  Customers,
with few applications to run, are taking their business elsewhere.
Investing Engineering money on the OpenVMS desktop market is bad business.

Ram

    	But weren't you once a very biased Unix engineering weenie,
    Ram? Not that that has anthing to do with this, of course! You may
    be right about sales in the midwest. All I'm saying is that the
    OpenVMS workstation business, like it or not, is still very
    significant and rivals our Unix workstation business overall. Now
    I agree that ISVs have migrated applications away from the VMS
    desktop and that the future OpenVMS workstation business and market
    isn't the brightest. So it may be futile and a waste of energy and
    money to heavily market and advertise this business and/or try to
    go after new markets and business when the industry is clearly
    moving in other directions. However, to hold market share and onto
    certain customers, you must invest in OpenVMS engineering on the
    desktop to a certain extent, or you effectively kill off that
    business in the wink of an eye, which we can ill afford to do. So
    what we do is choose how we invest those engineering dollars
    carefully to maximize the benefit we get, but we don't just simply
    stop investing in a multimillion dollar business.
    

In the used market, a VMS license is worth an extra 500 selling an 3000-300lx
over a DU license.  Used DU systems are NOT selling, or so says a 
california reseller, but VMS systems are...

YMMV,
Rick

    gee.  my customer just installed circa 500 workstations last quarter.
    ALL running VMS.  ALL running ISV code.
    
    the notion that "VMS is dead" is purely bogus.  to quote daffy & bugs:
    
    	"shoot him now!  shoot him now!"
    	"he doesn't have to shoot you now."
    	"yes, he does have to shoot me now!  i DEMAND that you shoot me now!"

    Ram,
    
    I work for the DEC-SALE SW licensing team.  Obviously using stats
    from an 800# is unscientific, but the calls we get tend to back up
    what others are saying, i.e. there is a BIG demand for OVMS on the
    alpha platform.
    
    If we are asked to assist in licensing a NEW alpha box, we are seeing
    more activity in the Unix market especially with Internet configs; 
    but we are also seeing a good bit of activity toward NT.  This is not
    to say that we aren't seeing any new OVMS alpha systems also being quoted.
    
    You can talk to anyone who is migrating a customer from VAX to Alpha;
    although moving a customer from OVMS VAX to Alpha Unix is not unheard
    of, it is still rather uncommon.  ISVs may have backed away from OVMS,
    but we have a wealth of OVMS layered products already ported and readily
    available on Alpha; we have a large installed OVMS base who are quite
    happy with this arrangement ;-)
    
    I don't think any company can shove one O/S down a customer's throat.
    IMHO, I believe the fact that Digital can offer 3 operating systems
    that will run on the same hardware architecture is a Digital strength,
    not a weakness.
    
     
    
    

In addition to existing VMS customer base I heard
NT affinity is bringing in some new customers to OpenVMS.

-Sudhakar

There are limits to what we can determine based only on what sales come to
us.  How do VMS sales -- any platform -- compare to UNIX sales in the real
world?  And how far will we get if we insist on hugging the tree?  We
should make the most money we can from VMS while not annoying those loyal,
sensible customers; but if we don't take substantial numbers of new buyers
from our competitors, we're losers.

In fact, we're so stupid we continue to have this same argument over and
over and over, and don't think the customers don't notice it.  They do.
They see perfectly well that there is no clear, consistent, culturally-
committed stance in Digital about our three beloved operating systems.  Do
you think for an instant that this kind of thing goes on at Sun? HP?
Microsoft?  It does not.

We don't live in the real world.

Optimistically,

___Pete

    re -.1
    
    >>> you think for an instant that this kind of thing goes on at Sun?
    >>> HP? Microsoft?  It does not.
    
    It most certainly does. Those companies have multiple operating systems
    with fractional camps, loyal followers and naysayers just like us.
    
    Those people have committed even greater mistakes and snafus in the
    O/S space than we could have ever imagined.
    
    But.....remember... we get no respect. We have poor marketing and even
    poorer spin doctors. Add that up and the market place does *not* see
    you, or hear your NEW story.
    
    OpenVMS, UNIX and MS Windows. The *best* story around, on two platforms
    from *one* company. I like the choice.
                 
    -Mike Z.
    
    

Re -.1

>> you think for an instant that this kind of thing goes on at Sun?
>> HP? Microsoft?  It does not.
> It most certainly does. Those companies have multiple operating systems
> with fractional camps, loyal followers and naysayers just like us.

HP?  They made their decision for UNIX long ago (well, that and those
business-popular PCs) and haven't wavered an instant.  We watched them do
it.

Sun?  "Multiple operating systems"?  You must be kidding.  I see a lot of
Sun, and they've never seemed in the least confused.  It's UNIX.

Microsoft: still kidding, right?  It's Windows -- 3.1, 95, or NT, but
always Windows.  No confusion.

I repeat: we in Digital are confused, uncertain, rigid, and religious, and
the customers accurately pick this up.  Here's a little story.  Last week I
was talking to someone in a giant bank (1000 Sun workstations and 300 Sun
servers under UNIX -- these replaced VAX VMS systems -- 29000 Compaq PCs
running Windows, maybe 60 legacy Digital systems of all stripes worldwide,
including 2 with UNIX), who said

	"I just sent one of my people to a UNIX internals course at
	Digital.  He told me that on the last day of the course the
	instructor summed up by saying that after all, UNIX isn't very
	important and they should really be looking at Windows NT.  This
	has once again given us the feeling that even after all these years
	Digital still isn't serious about UNIX."

What could I do?  I'm afraid that when I saw their salesman alone, I blew
up in his face.

___Pete

>What could I do?  I'm afraid that when I saw their salesman alone, I blew
>up in his face.
    
    Sounds messy.

>> What could I do?  I'm afraid that when I saw their salesman alone, I blew
>> up in his face.
> Sounds messy.

I sure hope it was.  I was furious.

___Pete

    
     Ok. Pete.
    
    So your major gripe is our position on UNIX. We seem to be cleaning up
    our act. So some people have bought the MS song and dance on Windows
    over UNIX. Some have not.
    
     My point is all the other companies support multiple operating
    systems, your point is they have a strong UNIX tag line.
    
     We seem to be the only ones that get scrutinized for offering
    the customer choices..."Can they support multiple O/S's?" "do they
    *know* what they are doing?"
    
     I say ...YES. I say ... we are doing what all other major computer
    companies are doing. Offering the customers "solutions".
    
     The EDinstuctor...well... probably a contractor... another story.
    We all have brains and mouths.. they all don't think alike or say
    the same message.
    
    -Mike Z.

	Sun is coming out with a Java-based operating system.

	Was the instructor a digital employee or one of our many	
	3rd party instructors? 

							mike

Folks -

Let's keep the focus Client/Server, and maybe it will be clearer:

Client
------
Like they say in Real Estate - Windows, Windows, and Windows!!
Looks like MS is going to land on WIN'95 for portables and WIN-NT
(with that WIN'95 "look & feel") for desktops.  No Alpha's in this
space either, given our price/performance versus Intel.  Enough already ...


Middle Tier (servers for File & Print, Internet, departmental applications
-----------  and etc.)
Currently a mix of VMS, UNIX, NT, and Novell - this one will eventually
be dominated by Microsoft as well.  Why?

-	32 bit price/performance on NT versus UNIX
	(think SMP Pentium Pro @200MHz here, as well as Alpha scaling until
	 WIN-NT clustering is a mature product)

-	Unified desktop strategy for both regular and high-end/specialized
	(SMP P6 and Alpha again, with PowerPC in here as well at some point)

-	Heavy cross-subsidization by MS of bundled products (Back Office)
	will force competition to drop margins on NT S/W, giving it even
	better price/performance over time versus UNIX.

-	Mindshare that neither HP or SUN can touch outside of technical
	markets ("Nobody ever gets fired by buying IBM! - Whoops - 
	I meant Microsoft!")

Enterprise Servers
------------------
I don't care what MS says here, this one will need at least 2-3 years for
NT to get at this space:

-	64-bit OS a MUST, in order to deal with the volumes of data
	here.  (How far along are we on the NT port?)  Meanwhile, both
	Digital UNIX and VMS are here, and HP, SUN, IBM, SGI, and all
	the rest are coming.

-	UNIX Clusters in '96, VAX clusters since ??? ('85??), NT clusters
	for 500-4000GB databases will be available - Within 18 months?
	I *don't* think so.

-	High availability solutions even before clusters.

-	Both UNIX and VMS (and MVS as well, but it's not 64-bit, is it?) 
	mature for commercial production environments with a track record.

-	The Microsoft issue (can MS be trusted with the whole ball of wax?) 


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottom Line, relative to the OS strategy issue:

-	Desktop / Windows - '95 & NT / customer choice; commodity H/W
	but commercial (not retail) quality (no "Starions", right?)

-	Middle Tier / NT & UNIX, no VMS - We should lean more towards
	NT here, but sell & support both; midrange quality and capability
	for the HW, using commodity standards and components (ex., PCI).
	Why lean NT here?  Because riding the NT wave in this space
	puts lots of pressure on both HP and SUN in their original
	key markets: technical workstations and departmental servers.

-	Enterprise Tier / UNIX & VMS only, no NT (as yet) - Emphasize
	our capabilities to use *either* O/S for enterprise solutions,
	and that our H/W platforms both integrate today with NT in the
	middle better than ANYONE elses, as well as being designed to
	migrate to all NT, when it is mature enough for the Enterprise
	level.  Key issue here is to show that VMS still has a role to
	play alongside UNIX, especially for our loyal VMS base (tell
	them to skip the VMS-UNIX migration if they want for VMS-NT
	hybrid today, followed by a NT-NT solution tomorrow, with the
	same H/W base!).

Try it, you'll like it  ...

Charles

> Was the instructor a digital employee or one of our many
> 3rd party instructors?

An employee soon to be a third-party instructor.

___Pete