Conference 7.286::digital

For requests like this, try VTX CALOOK.

			Steve

    
    	Steve -
    
    	Pound for pound, I find you one of the finest Digital has to offer;
    but here (re.-1) is not it. Customer Lookup is a nightmare infobase.
    It has virtually no information of real value, except to send someone
    on long, drawn-out telephone tag searching for out-of-date information;
    or information focuses which more clearly show our internal "its mine,
    not yours"; than providing someone with a useful resource.
    	Most accounts have literally dozens of references with senior
    managers as the primary contact; mostly in locations which are not
    primary purchasing points. Direct reps are NOT named in CALOOK, nor
    are the appropriate business managers or IB4000 partner currently
    covering the account.
    	CALOOK tends to reinforce everything that is broke at this point in
    time, as opposed to something that works.
    	While I agree with many that Werner can be a *real* pain in the
    behind, I can also attest to his dedication to making Digital a great
    company once-again while wrestling with emotionally disturbed customers
    who feel betrayed in placing their confidence with us.
    	The US field is currently walking an extremely fine line between
    insanity and "the light" these days. We depend on customer orders to
    make our goals, and everything that sends customers into a tizzy these
    days thus affects our performance. Couple that with sudden layoffs,
    constant field reorganizations, growing centralization and control of
    basic business decisions, and poor corporate communications to the
    "trenches" and it should be no wonder the field seems to be loosing
    it every other day.
    	
    	A little more kindness to us all would be a better place to start.
    N'est pas?
    
    			the Greyhawk

    Well, ex-CUUUUUSE ME!  *I* thought I was doing a kindness to point
    out an online resource which, as far as I knew, contained exactly
    the sort of information being requested,  Did I say "don't ask here"?
    
    I'm willing to accept that CALOOK's information is obsolete.  But
    please don't grouse at me for suggesting it as a possible resource.
    
    				Steve

	Steve - don't take it too personally.  I think that the
	Grousehawk is having one of those "manic things" at the
	moment and used this note to get a shot into the system
	and not necessarily at you.

	Most of what Greyhawk says on this matter is unfortunately 
	correct.

	Oh, by the way, I was grateful to learn about another tool 
	(CALOOK) - if only I could be sure that its data was reliable and if
	I could get something like this for European customer lookup.  It
	seems to have covered TEXTRON in spades (4 screens of info including
	the attached contact names) ;

/Chris.


Account Name:   TEXTRON INC                          AMID Number: AU1338979
 Customer Name:  TEXTRON SPECIALTY MATERIALS          Cust Number: 0819109

 City: LOWELL, MA  01851

 Coverage:       DIRECT COVERED           Site DUNS #: 043405257
 Segment:        END USER                 Ult  Duns #: 001338979
 Classification: INVESTMENT               SIC Code   : 8731

                Organization           Manager Name        Location / DTN
                
 Bus. Unit: SYSTEMS BUSINESS UNIT  SCOTT ROETH            MKO       /264-1132
 Region:    NORTHEASTERN REGION    KATHLEEN POWER         BXO       /224-1695
 Group:     NORTHEASTERN- OTHER A  KATHLEEN POWER         BXO       /224-1695
 Unit:      NEW ENGLAND ACCOUNTS   ANTHONY BORGASANO      OFO       /274-6540

 

    This gets to me.    Here we are a computer company with all
    of the great products at our disposal which one would think 
    would help the company as far as these procedural tasks.    
    
    Simple answers to simple questions like; who does what? where
    how, why should be answered in these tools... 
    
    In my 8 - 9 years here I have seen duplicated systems which 
    have overlapping functionality.   These overlapping systems 
    have duplicate staff for design and maintainance and are 
    typically thought out at the local level for use in 
    the corporate scope but lack corporate functionality (or 
    visa versa) .   VTX infobases which are so user  un-friendly 
    that users give up because they never work or are so akward 
    its pityfull!
    
    Often data seldom gets updated because the procedures and
    expectations are never laid out.    I believe that someone
    in this corporation needs to start taking the bull by the horns
    and start steering us towards better information systems which
    address specific local and corporate needs which are updated
    ASAP with the latest data.   
    
    I say this because alot of the people who used to do this
    type of work have been TFSOed without a understanding of 
    how the work needs to be transfered to others.  This has 
    recently happened to me with our corporate PATCH tools - 
    something goes into the mouth (CSSE) but never ended up in the
    toilet (CSC).   Either this was caused by the complexity
    of what should be a simple system to design/use or it
    was never really documented but handed off to new people 
    who try their best at getting the job done - but have
    no documentation to do it with.  
    
    I would like to see alot of these processes be audited
    for effectiveness myself as alot of these processes could
    be improved drastically by someone who is a good industrial
    engineer or programmer analyst type.    
    

    Sounds like everyone else feels the same way about our "tools".  VTX
    looks like it was developed for a typewriter.  Being really crummy to
    use is second, as the information is, as Greyhawk says, usually
    outdated, worthless, or missing.
    
    Use of VTX to find responsible individuals gives one a wonderful tour
    of the Digital that was...abandoned sites, defunct organizations,
    missing Digits, etc.  If this is supposed to be our "institutional
    knowledge base", I suggest we have Corporate Alzheimers.
    
    If it weren't for notesfiles (like this one), we'd each be an island in
    the Digital Sea.
    
    								Tex
    
    PS: Out of interest, does anyone think a *client* would ever buy
    something as kludgey as VTX or rely on the information contained
    therein?  If not, why should we?

    We have wonderful tools, without a doubt.  But how effective is a tool
    without a tool user?  I would be willing to bet that we have laid off
    the people who maintained and fed data into these systems.  I could
    cite you specific examples where I know that to be true.
    
    [I started to enter a long, mordant whine about crummy support
    services, but I think I'll spare you 8^)]

    Since the people "in the say" who formulated the TFSO list seemed to 
    FAIL to understand or document tasks which need to be back filled 
    effectively breaking alot of systems - maybe a corporate-wide audit 
    of all of the VTX infobases, databases and the like is in order? 

    
    	Ok, so I've taken this string over the side. My apologies. Now, any
    suggestions on how we can get someone "in the know" to fix this stuff.
    
    	My initial suggestion would be to have the people covering the
    named accounts in CALOOK responsible for keeping the infobase up to
    date. The question is How? and is it possible from a systems standpoint
    (can multiple sites input into an infobase?)
    
    	The tools may be a bit antiquated, but we *can* make them work if
    we apply some discipline and relavent focus, can't we?
    
    		the Greyhawk
    

There's nothing wrong with the tools themselves.  There's nothing really
wrong with VTX (most of the complaints people have about it are due to
poor implementation of the server pages, not VTX itself.)  But with ANY
"directory", no matter what format, it's only as good as the information
in it.  If there's nobody maintaining CALOOK then it is indeed worthless.
I don't know who is supposed to be responsible for it.

					Steve

    re :maybe a corporate-wide audit
        of all of the VTX infobases, databases and the like is in order?
    
    Those days may be gone.  Keep in mind folks in the position to
    audit don't know the information.  I would suggest when you see
    something wrong, let the owner/maintainer of the infobase know
    about it.  Contact names should be on everything; of course
    a server/infobase doesn't HAVE to be "corporate", you may be
    having problems with something a user or group put up themselves.
    
    The "GIA" names have been noted.  If they want to change their
    names, they should know how to do it (or they can mail 
    DRAGON::VTXREG).  It's on the list of things to be changed,
    the next revision is "currently" "scheduled" for q4. (sigh)
    
    VTX is hardly just typewriter, and several customers still
    use it.   In fact, MOST if not all are FAR more advanced that
    what Digital does internally.  There are very few that run 4 or more
    year old rev levels, don't update.. etc etc.  In any event,
    current vtx has motif, long pages, all binary type support -
    launchable pages, content based retreival - searching,
    session control, tcp/ip transport, winsock support and
    in all cases so far can be easily integrated into the web
    (given OpenVMS server restriction). You'd never know that
    the way Digital is using it.
    
    VTX in Digital STILL can get most information to most desktops
    in 2 weeks or less. It'd be nice if it was accurate
    and kept current, but that is not the product.
    
    A notesfile for vtx (the product) is galvia::vtx_technical, but 
    comments in other notesfiles, newsgroups, web pages, mail messages
    phone calls, get acted upon when seen.

    .10 There's nothing wrong with the tools themselves.  There's nothing really
    .10 wrong with VTX (most of the complaints people have about it are due to
    .10 poor implementation of the server pages, not VTX itself.)  But with ANY
    .10 "directory", no matter what format, it's only as good as the
    .10 information in it.  If there's nobody maintaining CALOOK then it is indeed
    .10 worthless. I don't know who is supposed to be responsible for it.
    
    VTX is basically broken into 3 functions:
    
    	1).  Application providers
        2).  Service Providers
        3).  Informantion providers
    
    and of course (subscribers)...
    
    What happens to an application if an application provider is TFSOed?
    Application maintenance and enhancments stop.  
    
    What happens to a VTX infobase if the information provider is TFSOed?
    When the VTX infobase never gets updated.  
    
    Subscribers still use infobase but...
    
    given those facts and the fact that some infobases have been
    rendered useless (never updated by the information providers - Digital 
    should make an attempt to audit of all corporate VTX infobases to 
    properly identify the "WHO"s of each VTX infobase.
    
    

    The "WHO"s of each infobase is updated weekly (by each
    Wednesday at 9pm eastern using whatever is submitted
    by Tuesday at 9am eastern, if you want the details).
    The result is buried in vtx REGISTRY (for example, choice 5).
    
    Mere updating is not the answer.  I doubt automatically purging
    after x days is either.  It's not likely that cleaning up your
    infobase is going to be part of the exit interview :-).
    I would accept any suggestions :-)  (takeing this rathole to mail
    would probably be best).
    _bill

    If you really want to rathole this string (which buy the way was
    envisioned as a 2-3 entry quick and dirty way to get a name and not as
    a soounding board for the discussions that occured) let's take off on
    the Integrated Repository portion of VTX. I have a real love-hate
    relationship with it. I can't tell you how many times I've put in a
    keyword search, received a reply screen that listed at least two
    choices that appear to have entries that satisfied the search criteria
    and then, upon making one of those choices, have been informed that
    "that information doesn't exist". That is a maddeningly stupid design
    flaw that needs to be fixed before it discourages everyone from using
    this tool.
    
    -OWFAMI-
    
    

    hmm, turns out it's your note, I guess you can rathole it any
    way you want...
    "That information is not available" is VTX the product's usual
    way of saying a connect to a remote server can't be made (or
    nothing matched a CBR search if set up incorrectly).  From the
    Corporate library, you shouldn't see that unless PKO is unreachable,
    as all infobases are "backed up" with failovers and alarms and
    occaisionaly a message to folks trying to reach it.
    
    However, the IR, which (last I saw) did not use DEC VTX searching,
    (it wasn't available when they needed it) has sort of a russian
    roulette to do the search and keep track of where you were.
    They shouldn't and probably don't have any remotes other than to
    their own servers.  You raise a valid point, the system appears
    to need tuning, and it's even MORE critcal as more infobases
    close down their own servers and merge into the IR.  I believe
    over time or possibly now the IR is supposed to merge and do more
    than at least 12(?) or so previously seperate servers/systems
    or about 150(?) entry points.  It'll need some tuning, I'd expect.
    I don't know if IR folks follow this thread.

    re: .2 
    
    	Regarding VTX CALOOK.  The data base was updated and was accurate
    as of 11/30/95.  The data was as the corporation sees it for FY'95
    assignments.  
    	Yes it is true for the "Named accounts" (ABU) the actual sales
    person is not listed, but that was a mgt/business decision it could be
    done.
    	All of the IB (installed base accounts) do list the actual sales
    person responsible for the account and it even lists the primary
    indirect channel that the account used last year to purchase our
    products.  Does it have errors... probably so... but as they are
    uncovered they are corrected.  Is it perfect... what is?  How do I know
    this... Well I'm one of many IB Sales Reps, and my name is listed as
    the Installed Base Account Manager on every account currently assigned
    to me.
    
    Regards,
    
    Tony

Re: .17

11/30/95?  I didn't think we were that forward-looking. :-)

				Steve

No, Steve, *18*95.

Paul

    oh.  and i just thought the date was caluclated on a pentium.

    RE. 18
      
     Sorry about that.... I should've said 11/30/94
    
    Tony

re:    11/30/94, or 30/11/94, or whatever
    
    What is that in dog years, anyway?

	day-month-year has been the dec std. for at least the 22 years I've been
working here.

Keith

    It's the European way of writing the date as well
    
    

Of course - us Europeans are all consistent little-endians
(dd/mm/yyyy) or, when ISO style takes our fancy, consistent
big-endians (yyyymmdd).  This least-significant-part-in-the-middle
format is just bizarre!

    Not bizarre; we simply write numeric dates the same way we deal with
    dates in general. In letterheads, speech, etc, we tend towards the
    Month Day [year] form. Today is January 5th, 1995 (1/5/1995), New Years
    was January 1, my birthday is October 29... The only exception that
    comes to mind is July 4th, which almost always is referred to as the
    Fourth of July. Consider that the higher order key on a calander is the
    month, not the date or the day-of-week.
    
    Speaking of day-of-week, I wish I could figure out why there seem to be
    cultural differences; in the US, weeks are Sunday thru Saturday, whereas
    in lots of other countries weeks go from Monday thru Sunday.
    
    Dave

    
|    Speaking of day-of-week, I wish I could figure out why there seem to be
|    cultural differences; in the US, weeks are Sunday thru Saturday, whereas
|    in lots of other countries weeks go from Monday thru Sunday.
    
    Perhaps the American's like to start and end the week with vacation :-)

    >Per

     [One of original developers of DECwindows Calendar and person who
      insisted on customizable "First day of week"]

    I always thought "Monday through Sunday" had something to do with
    the biblical "On the Seventh Day, ..."  I suppose that's more a topic
    for JOYOFLEX, though.
    
    ed

Some of us believe that "the seventh day" refers to Saturday or, more 
specifically, sunset Friday to sunset Saturday.  ;-)

- Scott

In the USA, is the phrase "next weekend" when uttered on
Saturday synonymous with "next day" ? 

    Depends on who utters it.  I use "this weekend" to mean the one coming
    up, "next weekend" to mean the one after.  Some people use "this" and
    "next" interchangeably.  Depends on the region, I think.
    
    								Tex

>    I always thought "Monday through Sunday" had something to do with
>    the biblical "On the Seventh Day, ..."

Ah!  That explains it!  Most Europeans are Sabbath-is-Sunday Christians, and
most Americans are Jews and Seventh-Day Adventists.

    So what is the end of the the week for Atheist and Deist?
    

    Atheists don't believe the next week begins after this one ends. :^]
    
    							Tex

    
    ...and deists don't believe God has anything to do with the
    relationship between this week and next.
    

    re: .34
    
    Most Americans are...
    
    since when??????
    
    That's as bad as a European pen pal I had who thought we (Americans)
    all lived like JR Ewing on South Fork-style ranches!
    
    hahahhahahahahahahahaha
    
    all Jews or Seventh-Day Adventists...
    
    yeah right...
    
    forgetting just a few others, aren't we???
    
    ;^)
    
    

>    That's as bad as a European pen pal I had who thought we (Americans)
>    all lived like JR Ewing on South Fork-style ranches!
    
    What?  Y'all mean you *don't*?!?!?
    
    								Tex

re .38

Most Americans can't spot a tongue-in-cheek statement
without having it made painfully obvious!

 :-)
 

    HEY HEY HEY!
    
    Stop being so da**ed NASTY!
    
    ;Z
    

    
    Personally I prefer 950106 - it is easier to sort/index by.
                          

    yymmdd is short-sighted - the millenium is coming!
    
    (and I already mentioned yyyymmdd in .27)
    
    

    Since the IRS only needs 7 years - I don't look that far back to have
    conflicting centuries...

Why not forget about month-day-year, year-mopnth-day or whatever and all use
Julian Dates?

You mean like IX Ian MCMXCV?  Whoops, that's today's *Gregorian* date.  I think
the Julian date's about 12 or 13 days earlier these days.

    I thought the calender had already been changed, I heard that Bill
    Gates had aquired the gregorian calender and redefined it.
    
    Adrian
    
    Reply posted 11th Jan, Win 95.
    
    p.s. Taking things to a (il)logical conclusion, there will probably be so
         many new months added to Win 95, that we will never get to the
         millenium ;-)

>    I thought the calender had already been changed, I heard that Bill
>    Gates had aquired the gregorian calender and redefined it.
    
   Bill just wants to make damned sure Win95 ships in 1995 - even if that means
    redefining 1995.

    re: references to Windows 95
    
    I use Windows 95 day-to-day in my office and on my laptop.  I'm
    convinced it is in better shape than PC-DOS 1.0 was when *IT* shipped.
    
    tony
    (who's not quite sure if it's good or bad that MS is waiting... musta
    not been at home when they called me for my advice.  ;^}  )

    Does an achronome help you space acronyms regularly through the text?
    
    Is that what it's foror....?
    
    :-)
    Leslie