Conference 7.286::digital

    
    I'm an engineer in Low End Disks, and I have a VaxStation 3100 on my
    desk for running UniGraphics (mechanical CAD) software.
    
    I also use (as a last resort) DECWrite and DECDecision Calc, but 
    frankly, I really disklike both products.  I find them to be, um, not
    as good as their MS-Windows counterparts.  Their performance over the
    network is so absymal as to cause tremendous frustration.
    
    At home I have a 386/33 PC that has Corel Draw, Word, Excel and MathCAD
    installed.  These MS-Windows packages are a dream to use, but I'm a
    little irked at having to use my own resources to get to the tools that
    I want to use.  You see, I've been trying for 1.5 years to get a PC on
    my desk at work, but it just isn't possible.
    
    After seeing eXcursions (a wonderful X windows emulator made by DEC),
    I'm convinced that I could get far more work done on a PC, since I
    could have my CAD software running right next to my MS-Windows
    software.
    
    However, since Corporate has passed an edict banning the internal
    purchase of PCs, it is now difficult to impossible to get one.  My
    department gets around the edict by renting PCs for $600 per month.  Of
    course, after only three months, we are losing $600 per month on the
    rental costs, so it all seems pretty stupid to me.
                               
    Anyway, it will take a major paradigm to get management around here to
    recognize the benefits of having a PC on every desktop.  I'm sorely
    tempted to buy another computer for work with my own money, just so
    that I can get my job done better and faster than the next guy.
    
    Ed.

    Re: .0   I totally agree with you.
    
    Re. .1   You are not alone.  I have been trying to get a PC for my 
             office for the past 1+ year.  I am a PC Tech Support engineer
             and deal with a lot of PC software applications.  I am also
             a Certified Netware and Banyan Engineer and do a lot
             LAN support.  Guess what I have on my desk.... a vt220.
               

    The implications go far beyond just our own internal productivity. 
    Unless you are exposed to what the rest of the world is doing, you
    don't know how high the bar is.  I fear that many of our development
    people aren't comparing their new software to what the rest of the
    world is used to seeing.
    
    Us sales slugs recently started getting notebook PCs.  During 
    introductory training, lots of digits (way too many) were oohing
    and aahing over what they could do with Word and Excel.  Having only
    used All-in-1, they were blown away.  Yet these people are out trying
    to compete -- they didn't know what they are up against.
    
    Fact:  you can do a heck of a lot more and a lot faster with an
    intelligent device on your desk.  Paradigm shift.  But even more
    important is how the user FEELS about the way heshe is working.  
    
    We cannot stay in business by continuing to strip-mine our installed
    base.  We have to compete with first-rate tools against the best that's
    out there.  
    
    Larry
    
    
     

    A couple of the managers in my group are, I believem replacing
    their workstations with DECpcs.
    
    As for me I don't see a big win in that. I develop code that runs
    only on VMS. We test clusters with it and only VMS has clusters. I've
    got a PC at home, entering this on it in fact. I like it a lot. But
    I haven't found an editor I like as much as TPU. And while I'm sure
    there is something like MMS and CMS available for MS-DOS I haven't
    seen it yet.
    
    AMI PRO is much better than DECwrite I'll admit but it's no VAX
    DOCUMENT. I know DOCUMENT has it's detractors but for very large
    books and multi author works it really works well. And that's what I
    do most at work.
    
    So I see pluses and minuses in both. By all means if all one does is
    spread sheets and word processing use PCs. But I don't think that PCs
    are best for everyone. I could be wrong so give me a networked PC at
    work and I'll try it.
    
    			Alfred

    >AMI PRO is much better than DECwrite I'll admit but it's no VAX
    >DOCUMENT. I know DOCUMENT has it's detractors but for very large
    >books and multi author works it really works well. And that's what I
    >do most at work.

    I was doing some research (ok, just flipping through magazines) on 
    buying a What You See Is What You Get type editor .
    I found that there doodles of word processors out there for the PC , 
    This is list of some I came across:
    (I dont know all the capabilities of these, but some of these I know for
    fact you can make books with them.

    1. EXP , general and math word processor , costs $300 
    2. Scientific Word (general and math , written by the people who wrote the 
       equation editor part for AMIpro), costs $600
    3. Microsoft word, general and math
    4. Chiwriter, general and a math editor  , cost $290
    5. personal TEX, with previewer and tones of fonts. also latex macors
    6. AMIpro , general and math
    7. MathType, by design science, this is used in conjunctions with other
       editors such as AMIpro and Microsoft word, to give you more features
       and symbols for equation editing than available with say AMIpro or
       Microsoft word, it uses OLE (object linking and embedding), to 
       communicate with other editors, cost $250
    8. Symantec just Write
    9. Windows Write
    10. WordPerfect 
    11. WordStar
    12. Aldus Pagemaker
    13. Microsoft Publisher
    14. SPC professional write plus
    15. Wordperfect

    in all, I prefer WYSIWYG editors, because I have astigmatism, I prefer
    to see how does what I write look like as I write it, this way I also
    can detect spelling mistakes much faster than with non WYSIWYG editors.

    thank you,
    /Nasser

    Face it. This company will die sinking its
    technical resources into making VMS and ULTRIX to be followed by the
    "Old Software Foundation" operating system (thats OSF) all viable
    before going with where the industry is going./
    
    We are in the midst of having our funding finalized, guess what it is,
    mostly VMS and OSF centered. THis is the typical reaction of a dying
    company, shore up and milk your proprietary base. Frankly it might be
    helpful to make some improvements in our products which have become so
    trashy from all the parochial architectural infights and passable
    software quality.
    
    In about a year Jim Liu's operation will probably realize the vision
    of making alot of PCs in volume at a very good profit. And all the
    software there company will have will be VMS and Oh so F (OSF)
    
    Frankly I am an optimist. I think DEC will come around and you'll see
    alot of software development shift to PCs, but I believe it will take
    two years before you see it really start. Management is kind of slow,
    Some engineers are slow too, but the real glaciar is the entrenched
    management built up during our great success period. Then we have
    Rapid Robert who will recongnize the ineffective management. He can't
    miss that
    
    Tom
    
    PS (Old Software Foundation, and Oh so F, (C) Tom Boyle Aug 1992)
    

    Re: .4
    
    There are a number of PC programs out there that produce books, and
    my understanding is that many are superior in many dimensions to
    Document. The one I'm familiar with is MS Publisher. Anybody else
    have experience with this stuff?
    
    							Thanks
    							Jon

    By the way, when was the ban on ordering PCs? Apparently it was
    ignored here or we got an exception because we need to have them
    to test PATHWORKS. I might have mentioned before, EVERYONE in PCSG
    has a PC or MAC on their desk, secretaries, managers, software
    engineers, quality test engineers.
    
    I think this is the way the rest of Digital needs to be; I think we need
    to point out to our supervisors, managers, and whoever else it takes
    to convince that we cannot make software for our customers unless we
    know their environment.
    
    DEC Tiger PCs cost no more than VTs. There is no excuse for VTs being
    on anyone's desk anymore.
    
    							Jon

>    
>    I think this is the way the rest of Digital needs to be; I think we need
>    to point out to our supervisors, managers, and whoever else it takes
>    to convince that we cannot make software for our customers unless we
>    know their environment.

Sometimes that environment includes non-PC hardware.
    
>    DEC Tiger PCs cost no more than VTs. There is no excuse for VTs being
>    on anyone's desk anymore.

How about those products that support them?  Certainly those people would need
them (I'd hate to tell a customer I could not reproduce a problem on a TIGER
when they were reporting it on a VTxxx).

    I don't doubt that there are PC packages that "do" books but I was
    specifically talking about multiple writers working on sperate parts
    of the same book. And besides I really don't like WYSIWYG editors. How
    many non-WYSIWYG publishing packages are there for PCs?
    
    			Alfred

    Thanks for note .0 Jon, I havn't read so much sense in so many
    short paragraphs in a long time. I will contact you today about
    this as I am working in this space and want to do whatever I can
    to help.
    
    One or two more points:
    
    o PC applications are going to be the only new development activity.
    
    o Even at present, PC's have many applications, only one of which
      is document writing.
    
    o The combination of alpha and windows NT will create very powerful
      work stations.
    
    o Nobody has mentioned multimedia. This is what is going to capture
      the imagination of the business and leisure market.
    
      I understand that there is PC oriented multimedia work happening
      in the corporation however it seems to me that we need to 
      develop/aid development or utilise available development to get
      into the leisure market first, not behind as usual.
      We need to develop or sponsor development of VLSI devices for sound,
      frame grabbing, real time video play back, radio LAN, speech
      recognition, home entertainment modules, etc.etc.  We also need
      to build them into a very cheap, fast PC based system which has
      the video and other speed sensitive controllers on local bus etc.
    
    o We also need to get past the idea of a PC as a stand alone computer
      system as it will clearly be functionally and physically,
      an applications specific box.
    
    o What about deals with TV companies etc. for the relaying of digital
      data packets, and the supply of HW and SW to achieve this. The answer
      to this is usually, that this is too far into the future.
      But surely the whole point of this is that you make the deals and do
      the development a good number of years ahead, to leapfrog the
      competition.
    
    o It says a lot that even although the market and computer pundits out there
      are all agreed that PC's will replace everything eventually...
      People within Digital are still debating the point!
    
    o Having PC systems on our desks would give us the luxury of internal
      user marketing detail which VMS systems have enjoyed for a number of
      years. It would also spark off development for niche applications
      and provide solutions.
    
      It would increase our ability to survive in the PC world! 
    
    Robin .

I agree with virtually all of this note string...

One slight alteration...

Instead of mandating PCs just let everyone make their own choice.  80%
will choose PCs.  The other 20% probably need something else.  Over
time they will get PCs too.

My view of what made DEC great in the 80s and how we can build on it.

In my opinion what made DEC great in the 80s was:

- Clusters
- DECnet
- One answer to all problems (VMS)

The last one is gone forever.  The first two can be "extended" to the new 
world.

Pathworks does much of what clusters and DECnet did in the 80s.  What is
needed now is Clusters/DECnet/Pathworks plus.  This would take mobile and
sometimes attached computing into consideration.

Basically, Clusters/DECnet/Pathworks assume that you are on the end of an
ethernet segment (generally).  The next step is to allow a machine that is
sometimes connected to get the same service.  The major tenets of this 
approach are:

1)  No application EVER requires a connection.
2)  Intelligent "Agents" cache data at various levels in the network to allow
	the PC and the servers to update each other quickly.
3)  Whenever the PC is connected the network link (which is the slowest part
	of the system) is constantly full passing data  back and forth.

This is the summary.

Everyone that uses notebooks (which is just about everyone) needs this
capability.  The Sales Laptop program is in desperate need of this.  No
one does a good job of this.

I believe that we have much of the component technolgies already.  What is
needed is for someone to package them to attack the problem.  For example

DECmessageQ allows for reliable data transmission but every application has
write its own interface

Pathworks does a fine job of data serving but requires Asynch DECnet which
is not too great for remote stuff.

The biggest issue is that applications have to be rethought to not roll over
and die if the data isn't their.  Notes is an example of this.  Notes 
requires you to be   touching the server.  In contrast Lotus Notes allows
(to the best of my knowledge) you to be completely separate.  The client
and server update each other when they are connected.  This needs to go a 
step further in that their needs to be generic services (not one for each
application) to do this updating.

I think that if we put the same level of energy and investment into this
type of technology as we did in Clusters and DECnet we could own this
envrionment.

Ken Slattery

    re .0
    
    >2. We, the engineers and marketeers and sales support people and the
    >rest of us that are the guts of Digital need to understand, and
    >utilize, the technologies used by our customers, so that we ...
    
    "the rest of us" include many people whose only use for a connection to
    the network is to 
    
    	a) run a bar code reader
    	b) execute specific material transactions in a captive application
        c) read and write in a captive mail account.
    
    "a pc on every desk" is just too simple.  Technology availablity is not
    Digital's problem.  Planning how to use technology wisely is part of
    Digital's problem.  Until managers have real reasons for the decisions
    they make about how work is done, we will not improve productivity.
    
    "Following policy", "the higher the rank, the higher the investment",
    "only programmers need pc's", and a lot of other cliches are no better
    than what you propose.  All are substitutes for thinking about the work
    to be done and how to do it efficiently.  That thought process is all
    too rare.
    
    fwiw,
    
    Dick
    

    re: .13
    
    There are PC applications for virtually every function in a corporation
    today, from bar-code reading to simple data entry to complex multiuser
    relational database to documentation and book publishing to
    multi-media editing (Packard-Bell just announced a $2500, full-function
    multi-media editing workstation - Intel architecture).
    
    As an example, two of our larger customers (500-700 users each) are law
    firms; use a DEC PATHWORKS system (clustered 6000s,
    I believe), and have all of their lawyers equipped with PCs. The
    PATHWORKS system maintains the database of law briefs, billing, etc.
    
    The PC is ubiquitous in every other major corporation. I'm just
    proposing that we catch up.
    
    Re: If a user has a problem on a VT connected to a VAX: it can
    be pretty easily reproduced using one of the many VT emulators
    available for the PC. If it's a LAT problem, then we go to the closet
    and blow the dust off the VT and LAT stored there. (:-)
    
    							Jon

    
    	Good topic, Jon, and some good ideas already.
    
    	I agree with Dick (.13), throwing technology at the problem is
    DEC's equivalent to the government throwing money at the problem.
    
    	We need to improve our work PROCESSES as much as we need to improve
    the technology we use to do it.  I've used both VTs and PCs (and
    occassionally a VS), but nothing else changed.  It seems that our
    customers have a better handle on their processes than we do and that
    hurts us more than the technology.  For example, BFG can take a phone
    order and tell the customer the _exact_ price and delivery date, can
    we?  
    
    	And we need METRICS (ones based on real, meaningful numbers) as
    much as we need to improve the processes they measure.  One of our
    problems right now when we're trying to 'rightsize' is that BP doesn't
    have hard numbers to base decisions on.  Most of what gets passed up
    through management is soft and gets massaged at every level until it's
    worthless.  For example, NMS was supposed to be based on P&L, BUT how
    much does a VAX 4000 cost?  Does that include engineering, admin,
    support, marketing, etc.  We can measure manufacturing and field people
    very closely and allocate their time to products or accounts but what
    about all the other people?  I spent 6 years in the GMA and was never
    'measured', everything was so subjective that it was impossible for
    anyone (including me) to say whether or not I did a good job.
    
    	The third thing we need is better, customer driven marketing.  For
    further discussion on that see NODEMO::MARKETING.
    
    Keep trying,
    It's obvious that the ideas to turn this company around will not come
    from the top.
    
    JN

I agree with the argument put forth in .15.  Tools are important to
the indivual and how fast he or she works, but processes are what
determine product quality. Value added is a catchy phrase, but people
have to ask what it is that their added value gets added to. 

-PHiL 

    re .0
    
    One of my customers would argue with you on the comparison between PC
    products and DECwrite, Jon.
    
    He waited breathlessly for DECwrite, and installed it as soon as the PC
    kit became available.  
    
    
    And he works for Intel, of all places.....(PC heaven)
    
    gil
    

Re: .18

There is also a bunch of WordStar, vi, or pick-your-favourite users who'd 
never swap. It still doesn't mean that the application they use is the best 
one for the task (except for them, because that's all they know or care to 
know and they can live with it and get the job done).

And on the other hand there are users to whom Lotus 1-2-3 is their spread-
sheet, editor, word processor, calendar, presentation tool and programming 
language of choice.

I wonder what your customer would say after learning & using  e.g. FrameMaker
for a while? (Note that the origin of DECwrite is in the same roots as early
FrameMaker releases.)

And the exception makes the rule, don't they say. ;-)

...petri

	What engineering needs to do is:

	1) Identify those products that we can deliver in a high quality,
	   profitable manner.

	2) Ensure that these products are given 150% of the resources
	   (hardware, people) that they think they need.

	3) get rid of everything else.

				Tom_K

Re: .19

Granted, there are always dinosaurs who would rather use outdated products 
that take the effort to learn new and superior ones.  Those observations
can be safely thrown out of this discussion.

It seems to me that the most objective viewpoint is one who has taken
the effort to learn and use both products.  What you have heard in thie topic
(if you go back and read it), is that there are folks who have done that, 
and find in many cases that the corresponding PC-based product provides
better functionality than the Digital product.  We need to fix this situation,
and the first step is recognizing that it IS a problem.

In the arena of desk-top publishing, the competition is high-end PC/Mac
systems.  Spend a couple days evaluating your latest set of requirements
against the current offerings in that space.  Extrapolate to see what the PC
based system will have out by the time our next version hits the streets, and
ask yourself: "If I worked for another company (describe target market), which
product/solution would I buy?"  Be sure to take pricing into account.
Answers like "obviously, Digital is better, I don't have to lok at that PC
stuff" are not valid.  They do not address the issue.

If your answer is not Digital, go back to phase 0.

Kevin

>Granted, there are always dinosaurs who would rather use outdated products 
>that take the effort to learn new and superior ones.  Those observations
>can be safely thrown out of this discussion.

    You mean like all those people who use that old Unix and VI stuff rather
    then VMS and TPU? 

>It seems to me that the most objective viewpoint is one who has taken
>the effort to learn and use both products.  What you have heard in thie topic
>(if you go back and read it), is that there are folks who have done that, 
>and find in many cases that the corresponding PC-based product provides
>better functionality than the Digital product.  We need to fix this situation,

    Over the years I've learned somewhere around a dozen text editors and a
    bunch of word processors. Three text editors in the last couple of
    months. And several word processors. Yes the WYSIWYG word processor on
    the PC (AMI PRO but not Word Perfect) is better then the corresponding
    DEC product (DECwrite). But so far just about everything else I've
    learned on the PC leaves things to be desired compared to corresponding 
    VMS product. Perhaps there's a lot of money we could make on PC
    software?

    Those who concider all DEC stuff second rate compared to PC software 
    should examine their own biases as they are asking other to do.
    
    			Alfred

    I agree with Alfred - let's not find ourselves biased against DEC's
    solutions or against tried & true products that people are happy with.
    
    The answer, as mentioned earlier in these replies, is to allow
    everyone to buy the tools they need to be successful and then
    hold them accountable for their success.
    
    That is the bottom line.
    
    That will mean a lot people will buy PC's. Some will connect via
    PATHworks, but some will connect with Novell (like 60+% of the
    marketplace does) and others won't connect to the network at all.
    
    It will become very obvious where Digital has successful businesses
    and where we don't.  Let's hope we can move to having more winners
    pretty soon!
    
    Karl B.

    I couldn't agree more with the spirit and direction of this topic. 
    Getting more PC's in the Digital community gets everyone at all 
    levels closer to how our customers are using computers.  Use what
    you like, but after you give PC applications a fair looksee, there
    is no comparison.
    
    I would add that being an evangelist for PC hardware is not the way to 
    accomplish this, internally or externally.  Managers at any company
    want payback, not the standard Digital pitch: "Buy such-and-such 
    hardware, and all your problems will go away".  If we engineer and 
    market something of real utility and obvious value, and communicate 
    that fact well, customers will follow.
    
    Some ideas: 
    
    1. TARGET WORKGROUPS - PC growth happens from the ground up, not 
    the 'enterprise' down.  Believe it.  Products that work well as single,
    stand-alone systems proliferate like bunnies.  Aim at small business,
    small departments in big business by providing good functionality 
    standalone, great functionality in small groups, incredible in the 
    enterprise. If Digital Group "A" had such a tool, Digital Group "B" 
    would find a way to buy it as well...pull vs. push. 
    
    2. DISTRIBUTION/SUPPORT - We can't recover the cost of direct sales 
    and support with the margin in PC products.  Enhance the  'Electronic 
    Store' with a Prodigy-like interface, add BBS functions and online
    support, then give it away like candy...a trojan horse. Internal and 
    external customers would love it.
    
    3. APPLICATIONS - Who are we kidding with DECwrite for Windows?  
    Rule #1 of offensive marketing is attack the market leader at the
    weakest point.  Windows WP is a crowded field; shift the target to 
    groupware for very small (3+) workgroups.  PC/Windows All-in-1 Lite 
    that lets you mail compound docs on a PC-based LAN in WYSIWIG.  A 
    decent Personal Information Manager.  A great Terminal Emulator 
    (compare VT emulator included in Pathworks to Reflection 2+...ugh). 
    PATHWORKS Lite that is cheap and installable by a secretary.  A 
    NOTES application.  Integrated vertical packages like a sales client 
    tracking system, bank teller system, video store system, medical 
    office system, etc.  
      
    4. HARDWARE - The new Tiger series are grrr-eat, but HP announced the 
    same thing (hot CPU, GUI and video speedup, etc.) this week.  The ALPHA 
    PC can hit a home run with a very low cost, shrink-wrap compatible
    system with a 2X performance advantage that is maintained over time.  
    If the market perceives Alpha as even a teenie weenie bit proprietary, 
    it is dead.  Dead.
    
    Dave
    
    

    I started reading the Digial notefiles recently,  thinking I might
    find some answers for all the problems we have as a company today.   I
    have been rather disappointed with most of entries as many of them
    simply restate or complain about the problems -- no added value.
    
    I find this note to be really refreshing.  We are talking about
    soltuions!   And I ABSOLUTELY agree that we need to get everyone to be
    PC-literate,  make that PC-EXPERT.   It's not good enough for us to be
    as good as our customers.  We need to be the experts.  After all,  we
    are a computer company and the one who is supposed to have the answer.
    
    It's NOT good enough that we use PCs, understand how NetWare or Lotus
    Note works and know how Token Ring differs from Ethernet (Token Ring is
    out-selling Ethernet now), etc.   Our customers already know that.
    
    We need to use PCs and other desktop devices to learn, develop, 
    troubleshoot networked applications (such as Paradox
    linking with Rdb or Sybase or <no flame please> Oracle,  DMQ, ACA,
    Imaging/scannig, OCR, voice, workflow, etc., etc.) and develop our
    internal applications.  IF we don't,  what would we have to sell two years
    from now?   Our customers would have learned the tricks and start using
    the new systems by that time (remember SUN and UNIX?) before we get
    there.  
    
    Yes we could sell a lot of PCs.  But Apple sells >$6B worth of PCs 
    with only 15000 people.  And
    Novell sells 10 times more PC LAN software with a few thousand people.  
    
    I guess what I am saying is that, as a company and as individuals, we
    need to not only catch up, we need to aim to get ahead.  And we can't
    wait for Digital to buy equipment if that's what you need.   Waiting
    for 6 months, 12 months is suicidal in our business today.   Microsoft
    would go from WIN3.1 to WNT in one year or less.   If you need a PC and
    can't get your CC to buy one?   Buy one through the EPP.   Don't wait
    any longer.   If someone is renting a PC for $300/month while waiting
    for the freeze to be lifted,  PLEASE,  buy one and somehow find way to
    get reimbursed in the future.   Or ask the rental company to provide a
    rent-to-own contract.  Let's not throw Digital's (and our) money away...
    
    keep this note going...  
    
    TRF  
    

Hi,

The memo below discusses my job in detail. Basically, my job is to integrate
desktops (specifically but not only PC/Macs) into DEC data processing in an
effective fashion.

I'd like to announce myself to you to solicit ideas on some things from 
you. Including them in this thread is good. Also please feel free to 
send me things directly. What I'd like to get are:

	How you've been handicapped in using PCs at DEC
	How you'd like to see PCs and their tools used at DEC
	Specific pilots that you'd like to see done - small ones now,
	bigger ones later
	Good uses of PCs in DEC that are used right now
	General comments about use of PCs to make DEC better for customers

So don't hesitate to send me mail, and I'll keep reading the notes file.
And I'll be sure to ensure that you get credited for the benefit that comes
from using your ideas.

Another question: I'm working with my manager, George Champine (one of the
people responsible for making Athena successful at MIT) to figure out
how to measure my success in this effort. It'd be easy to claim all the
credit for every PC installed in DEC, but that would be pretty silly and
self-serving. Please send me ideas on how to measure my success or failure
at getting DEC to effectively use PCs. Please make those metrics hard and
firm, and also please try to ensure that they're benchmarked against a
great user of PCs out in the real world.

		Thanks for your ideas,

		Bernard L. Hayes


From:	PLGRIM::CHAMPINE     18-AUG-1992 17:03:28.43
To:	@GROUP, @ISS, @STAFF, @EIB, @IMTMC, @DCE
CC:	
Subj:	Bernard Hayes announced as Infrastructure Desktop Strategy Manager



+---------------------------+ (tm)
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| d | i | g | i | t | a | l |           INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |           #111
+---------------------------+


To: Distribution                        Date: 18-AUG-1992
                                        From: George Champine
CC:                                     Dept: Information Mgmt & Tech.
                                        Ext : 223-8510
                                        MS  : MSO2-2/A9
                                        ENET: PKDEV1::CHAMPINE

Subject: Bernard Hayes announced as Infrastructure Desktop Strategy Manager    

I am pleased to announce that Bernard Hayes has accepted the position 
of Manager of Infrastructure Desktop Strategy (IDS).  In this position 
Bernard will be responsible for developing and coordinating the 
implementation of the desktop strategy for the new Information Utility 
including DOS/NT, MAC/OS, Ultrix/OSF-1, and VMS.  This infrastructure desktop
strategy will provide MIS services for Digital and outside customers through 
the 1990s and in to the 21st century.  

In defining the IDS, Bernard will define and implement strategy in two
broad but related areas. In the technical realm, he will develop models
for integrating the above mentioned desktops with resource servers in
a cohesive network computing environment. The goal is to use this 
architecture as a model for commercial computing environments of the 90s.
In the Information Systems realm, Bernard will be active in defining
a strategy for using desktop systems to allow users of Digital resources
to "informate", that is, to be able to abstract information from data
using tools and resources that are easy and natural for that particular
user. This ability will allow IM&T resources to quickly map into the
fluid organizational and information flow structures that characterize
today's business environment. 

Bernard will also be responsible for coordination with OSF and with the Pilgrim
project at UMASS/Amherst.  The first realization of the desktop strategy will
be in the MRO Infrastructure pilot. 

Bernard comes to us uniquely well-qualified for this position.  Most recently 
he was working on networking technology for the Massively Parallel Systems
Group. He has also been Project Leader of Project Pilgrim at UMass/Amherst,
a role that he will continue in this new position. He has also had positions
in Software Services in New England and Northern California, and in
Engineering.

Please join with me in welcoming Bernard to IM&T and to this new and 
exciting position.

    Interesting string.. This is something I've thought of often since
    coming to DEC about a year ago.
    
    My previous employer was a large N.E. based insurance company which had
    a 2000 person IS department.  When I first started working there it was
    strictly an IBM shop.. This is back in the mid 80's.  The last few
    years however, we diversified.  We started using VAX's to download data
    from the big IBM mainframes.  We got MAC's on our desks as well as our
    user's desks and proceeded to download the data even more.. At the time
    we ran into ENORMOUS difficulties because some of the things we were
    doing were rather cutting edge. 
    
    Over the 6 years I was there our users went from requesting us to 
    write COBOL programs to receive reports on their data (which was
    sometimes a several month process from start to finish), to querying the 
    data on VAX databases and downloading them to spreadsheets on their
    MAC's(with some technical help to get started at first).  Our customers
    were very happy needless to say.  I guess I didnt realy realize how 
    important some of the things we were doing back then.. 
    
    At the time I left my previous employer, I had a DEC workstation and a 
    Macintosh IIci (or cx not sure) on my desk.  When I started my
    job here I found a VT320 on my desk.  That is what I am typing on now. 
    When I indicated that we needed a PC to test the internationalized
    version of PATHWORKS I was told we couldnt get one.  (Why the
    restriction?)  I had to put in a request to reserve one of the IS PC's 
    for a few days to do this testing.  What we will do when we begin work
    on localizing PATHWORKS is a mystery to me.  
    
    This all seems soo backward to me.  When I worked for a DEC customer I
    had much more modern technology at my finger tips.. Shouldnt it be the
    other way around?? 
    
    Suzan

    re: last 6 or so
    
    Kevin Farlee works in the field, at a customer site, and not only
    sees, but has to deal with (justify/rationalize) with our customers why
    they made a "good" decision to work on DEC h/w and use DEC s/w. This is
    especially tough when they continually come to you and make
    snide/sarcastic/curious/querying remarks about DEC versus (mac/pc/??)
    
    I agree with what he said, since the rest of the following replies
    centered on hardware... he was talking about software. Unfortunately,
    DEC as a company still (although the products *are* good) lags behind
    alot of our "pc" competitors. Alot of our customers are cost consious,
    and when they see they can get what they want in WordPerfect, or Word,
    or Pagemaker or Canvas, or CorelDraw -- there is very very little
    Digital can do to "tell" them they should be buying DECwrite, or
    DECDesign, or DECxxx since they stop listening after you "tell" them
    the platform cost.
    
    I also know that most customers have no concept of "Workgroup" style
    s/w, hence see no need to purchase that versus a bunch of pc/mac and a
    bunch of wordperfects (for example). 
    
    Again and again, Digital has excellent products ready for very
    demanding jobs needing to be done by corporate america now, but we
    somehow cannot verbalize the reasons to our customers *why* these good
    products *are* good to them.
    
    Interestingly enough, lately I heard form a co-worker that DEC is so
    far ahead of the rest of America with their products, that by simply
    selling old (to us) solutions to corporations (Fortune 500), they would
    be ecstatic, since they "appear" to be so new!!!  Maybe the rub is that
    we can't get our customers to tell us how wonderful we are, so we just
    toss it all off!!
    
    oh well... back to the trenches -- I've got miles of revenue to
    generate before I sleep tonight...
    
    Bruce

    
    	While checking DIAL I found over 60 "excess inventory" 386 PCs from
    KAO (Kanata).  Do you suppose they already upgraded to Tigers which
    were available there first?
    
    	If your group NEEDS some PCs, checkout VTX DIAL!
    
    JN