Conference 7.286::digital

Good one. I really like it. Much better than the generic and somewhat 
unrealistic "Whatever it takes" phrase.

But "Alpha on board" is only good for the systems, and doesn't 
address non-product issues like service, etc.

    
    The tag line to the DIGITAL logo would not be tied to Alpha - any Alpha
    XYZ tag or monniker would need to be useful to our partners like
    Mitsubishi or Samsung so that they would have an Alpha ingredient
    type program they could leverage. One that is too strongly tied to DIGITAL
    will not help proliferation of the use of Alpha technology to other OEM
    firms. An ingredient type program using Alpha does have merit.
    
    Also, DIGITAL sells billions of dollars of x86 architecture products,
    along with Alpha, and all of our Communications work focuses on having
    a broad portfolio of both Alpha and x86 products - not limiting the
    company to one implementation from an image standpoint.
    
    So such a tagline fails for both DIGITAL marketing and partner
    leverage reasons. 

This is what the "AlphaGeneration" logo is supposed to be.

			Steve

    Someone in HLO2 suggested "Alpha instead," which is clever because it
    suggests, "Don't settle for 'i**** inside'," while being comfortably
    beyond legal challenge as long as the design isn't copied.
    
    Hmmm, oh, yeah, that dual-platform strategy, well...
    
    M  

RE: .3

>    Mitsubishi or Samsung so that they would have an Alpha ingredient
>    type program they could leverage. One that is too strongly tied to 
>    DIGITAL


Please don't use "leverage" as a verb.  Thank you.

But I should thank you for not also using the word "synergies" in the 
same sentence.

Net result: 0 points.

    re: "Alpha Instead"
    
    I have a "Cyrix Instead" T-shirt which Cyrix gave out at comdex a few
    years back. The shirt also has the word Ditto in a draw circle like the 
    "Intel Inside" logo.  Cyrix quickly stopped using it when Intel 
    complained it looked like the their logo.

    -Bruce

    ...or "Alpha Powered"
    
    Kingston uses something similar.

    .6 
    
    We often drop the verb phrases like "use as" leverage.  Point taken.
    
    I do endeavor to avoid phrases best left to the Dilbert phrase book,
    but we all have our moments of weakness.
    
    BT

>This is what the "AlphaGeneration" logo is supposed to be.
>
>			Steve

And of course, this really is meaningless, true to form when it comes to 
DIGITAL marketing.

It would be nice to have something like Intel has.  I like the 
'powered by ALPHA' or some such that says something you don't need to 
interpret.

    >We often drop the verb phrases like "use as" leverage.
    
    Actually, we seem to have a disturbing proclivity for trying to turn
    perfectly good nouns into verbs...

    Most people are "Intel inside" brainwashed I assume you propose
    similar brainwashing activity for the Alpha.   All fine and dandy
    but what market should this activity be addressed too?   On the intel
    side these people are PC heads for the most part.   Good reccomendation in 
    that we need to get our product recognition up - but this will do nothing
    if consumers will have a hard-time FINDING the product let alone
    PURCHASING the product.   To date Digital's efforts to get a foot into 
    retail chains has been less than almost nothing!
    
    We could even invent a sound... to duplicate the Intel 
    inside sound... you've heard it... we could do alot - BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING
    WE SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON WOULD BE TO:
    1).  OBTAIN A RETAIL CHAIN MARKET PRESENCE thru VARs?
    2).  MAKE IT EASIER FOR VARS, ALPHA RESELLERS TO DO BUSINESS WITH
         DIGITAL
    3).  PRICE FOR THE MARKETPLACE
    
    BOTTOM LINE - all the marketing of Alpha products would be wasted
    unless customer's can:
    
    1).   see benefit of purchasing product
    2).   Easily find product
    3).   Purchase product for competitve price.

    .0 - question - 
    
    Did you learn how to run before you learned how to walk?
    
    My point is that there are a whole lot of other issues that need
    to fall into place before we need to worry about catchy marketing
    phrases etc...
    
    

>    Actually, we seem to have a disturbing proclivity for trying to turn
>    perfectly good nouns into verbs...

It's called "verbing a noun".

-Chris

    RE: .10
    
    Why is AlphaGeneration meanlingless?  Pepsi sure did well with
    PepsiGeneration, yes?
    
    				-John

NSIS have always provided an "Alpha" service.

Alan

>    Why is AlphaGeneration meanlingless?  Pepsi sure did well with
>    PepsiGeneration, yes?

Funny you should ask... I think of the Pepsi-Generation when I look at that
logo on my ALPHA box.  The difference is, Pepsi's marketing campaign basically
urged people to join the pepsi-generation, targeted towards a specific market
(youth) inspiring them to do like others in their generation do.

By itself Pepsi-Generation doesn't mean a lot.  Put a marketing strategy with
it, and it does.

Intel-Inside, when I first started seeing them, had no marketing associated 
with it.  It was just a sticker that let people now that there was something
called Intel inside thier PC box.  That should be 'nuff said.

Alpha-generation, as far as I know, has never had any sort of marketing strategy
behind it.  So in my opinion, it doesn't mean anything.  

    Since I started this, I am obliged to give some response to the
    feedback from my fellow Digital colleagues. In the spirit of good
    sportsmanship, I'll do this in one minute. However, if you guys pursue
    me too vigorously in the cyberspace, I'll have to warp into Nintendo 64
    and keep company with Mario -- resulting in a win for SGI.
    
    First, last thing first:
    .13 - answer -
    
    Your point is well taken in that there are lots of things for Digital
    to do. However, nowadays every respectable computer comany have
    muti-processing capabilities.
    
    I did learn to swim before I learned to walk; even though nowadays I
    walk better than I swim. In the Animal Kingdom, certain species also
    learn to fly before they learn to walk.
    
    re. .2:
    Alpha onboard is intended to mean Number one Service on board.
    
    As to why some people did not relate well with alphageneration, what I
    heard was that other people subconciously thought it to mean
    firstgeneration only.
    
    I just want to tickle you; ha ha ha, please smile.
    
    bps (Robert)
    

    Seeing that most folks can't use all the cpu power of ALPHA today, why
    not
    
    ALPHA ON, Bored

RE: <<< Note 5295.12 by CSC32::C_BENNETT >>>

>          -< market AFTER laying down the foundation- NOT BEFORE!~~ >-

Don't forget about the importance of demand-generation activities. If
consumers have never heard of a product, they won't go shopping for it, and the
seller won't have a motivation to offer it. If consumers ask for an un-stocked
item, on the other hand, perhaps the seller would consider offering it.

Digital would be little hurt (and perhaps much helped) by making people more
aware of Alphas. 
						-- Tom

    .18    - 
    
    I don't believe you have grasped the concept I am attempting
    to communicate.   
    
    We have the fastest processor - what have we done with 
    it so far? 
    
    You worry about a wiz bang slogan - what I am saying is that
    the best wiz-bang slogan will get Digital nowhere unless the
    1) market is identified and the 2) sales relationships are made
    with companies who will sell the product.   In addition we
    (Digital) need to understand that there is a 3)customer perception
    that Digital is hard to do business with.  
    
    Save the wasted time on a wiz bang slogan...revisit after Digital
    has effectively addressed the 3 items listed above...

    
    We have had good press on the Alpha and I know alot of people who
    would love to get there hands on an Alpha box.    In the 6 people
    I know of - the reasons they still don't have an Alpha box are:
    
    1).  Cannot go to the nearest computer store and pick it up like they
         pickup there intel based products.   
    >>>In these cases the demand was there but the systems were not!
    CORRECT THIS BEFORE TALKING WIZ-BANG SLOGANS
    
    2).  Got feedup with calling Digital and PC direct or whatever its
         called now - becase we/they appear dumb to the idea of selling
         anything.   
    >>>There is a growing perception that Digital is "customer unfriendly"
    CORRECT THIS BEFORE TALKING WIZ-BANG SLOGANS
    
    3).  Packaging - we appear to lag behind for example there were days
         when you could only but a 4x when 8x's were the rage...   this 
         seems true for modems...
    >>>THE CPU is a consideration although there are other factors in
    >>>manufactuing-time to market that Digital needs to understand./
    CORRECT THIS BEFORE TALKING WIZ-BANG SLOGANS
    

RE: <<< Note 5295.22 by CSC32::C_BENNETT >>>
    
>    1).  Cannot go to the nearest computer store and pick it up like they
>         pickup there intel based products.   
>    >>>In these cases the demand was there but the systems were not!

I'm glad to hear that there was some demand. But apparently there was not
enough of it (over time) to cause the computer store to carry the product. I
doubt that Digital would regret having too much demand. 

Even in a case like the hiNote Ultra lap-top, where insufficient quantities
were manufactured to meet demand, are we sorry that the demand was there?
						-- Tom

    alphageneration is dead and the semiconductor org. is working with
    Bruce Claflin on a new thing.  I think I saw reference to it in one of
    the replies.  I don't know if it's being kept quiet, so I won't reveal
    it here.
    
    Mark

     
     		Windows NT is Gold...
     	Linux is cool and Windows 95 to be cold,
     	WNT takes them all.
     		Windows NT is Gold...
     	WNT moves them all,
     	Intel inside or Alpha onboard,
     		Windows NT is Gold...
     	Linux is cool and Windows 95 to be cold.
    
    bps
    FREE POEM FOUNDATION 
    COPYLEFTTED

Bring back the old Alpha logo with the lightning bolt and the green pins.

PJDM

RE: back a few, 3 steps, agreed.

Or, make a deal with Gateway.  Have them put together a new
Alpha based PC.  I think they know how to sell.  Considering
their moves relating to business product lines, now would be
a good time.

Then, new Alpha logo, and marketing, in partnership with 
Gateway.  Alpha --- engage!

Dennis

Think of the possibilities, if we could offer those not-so-
secret new top-of-the-line systems to Paramount for use in
the next Star Trek movie, due in '98.

(couldn't help myself, just watched Part 1 of Voyager season
 cliff-hanger)

    How 'bout ....
    
    "Alpha 64-Bit Fast"
    
    But as previous points note , we need great marketing with lots of
    imaging to get the point over and target the likely Mr & Mrs bloggs
    that head down to Harvey Norman's on Saturday looking to buy a PC.
    
    Something like " Sir, we have the XYZ Pentium with 166Mhz CPU here
    for $1750, but this Alpha 64 Bit 266Mhz box is the same price but
    its performance is over the top "
    
    The consumer has to WANT to buy the product, the only way this happens
    is marketing and extracting the subconcious perceived needs of the 
    consumer.
    
    Why do you drink Coca Cola when you can buy plain wrap cola at the 
    supermarket?
     

    >Or, make a deal with Gateway
    
    Last week Bob pissed away any opportunity he had of a major Intel
    tier 1 vendor ever adopting Alpha.
    K

    
    re: .29, .30 - I think discussions of Intel lawsuit and its
    implications should be kept to one's self, not shared.  What can
    DIGITAL possibly gain?

>    re: .29, .30 - I think discussions of Intel lawsuit and its
>    implications should be kept to one's self, not shared.  What can
>    DIGITAL possibly gain?

Although it's extremely frustrating, is it not a fact that such discussion in
internal forums is proscribed by our employer?

Re: .32

It is.

	Steve

    Re: many
    
    Everyone keeps talking about reaching the consumer, Mr & Mrs. XXX going
    to Harvey Norman's, etc. Has everyone forgotten that we GOT OUT of the
    consumer market for PCs some time ago? Unless that changes, you won't
    see marketing targeted at the average consumer. A Gateway sort of
    partnership would be good for the semiconductor group,  but that's
    about it. (not that that is bad, since the life of the company is
    geared on selling lots of those chips!).
    
    Debbie
    

    
   >Last week Bob pissed away any opportunity he had of a major Intel
   >tier 1 vendor ever adopting Alpha.

    You have a unique outlook on this that begs for response.  But since
    any discussion would be balancing on the edge, I won't start one.
    
    Tony
    
    

.0>    		Alpha onboard
.0>    competitors' much publicized catchy phrase, e.g. "what's inside ?".
    
    With just putting a catchy sticker on the system box you might keep
    buyers away. Think about it...INTEL inside gives a certain guarantee
    that an out-of-the box Windows program will run on this system. If a
    customer does not know the whole story about WHAT Alpha is and that
    there's FX!32 they'll just skip that box and focus on the "Intel
    inside"...just to be sure.
    
    Besides being fast you have to prove it'll run...and all with a 
    sticker (?).
    
    Guenther

    hi,
    
    INTEL say's     "INTEL inside"
    they do not say "PENTIUM inside"
    
    so I think we must bind the message prefered to "DIGITAL" !
    
   
    helmut

    re: the Gateway approach, Intel Inside, et al ...
    
    I think you forgot the step that precedes a customer looking for the
    "Intel Inside" logo:
    
    "MS-Windows 95 inside"
    "my favorite wordprocessor,spreadsheet,graphics package inside"
    "Reader Rabbit inside"
    "Command and Conquer/Quake/Carmen Sandiego/Mechwarrior/etc. inside"
    
    You get the picture, I hope. Nobody buys a PC just to have a PC. They
    buy it because it runs the software they want. Not just *some* of the
    software, *all* of it. Until someone comes up with a way to run all of
    the off-the-shelf software available for the Intel box, then there will
    be one choice available to average end-user -- Intel. Or maybe one of
    it's truly direct competitors like AMD and Cyrix.
    
    There are some PC's that are bought for specific point use. CAD/CAM is
    one of the most frequently mentioned, but is hardly one of the most
    prevalent. In fact, I'd bet that point-of-sale PC's outnumber them by
    several factors. So again, given the software non-availabilty, does
    anyone truly have an idea what the realistic total market might be for
    a generic low-cost Alpha PC? I've never seen any market study that
    really addresses this, just vague references to the vast number of PC's
    being powered by Intel, including everything from home PC's to embedded
    OEM systems...
    
    Geoff

                             +-------------+
                             |d|i|g|i|t|a|l|
                             +-------------+

                                  ALPHA

                                   on

                                  Board

|   INTEL say's     "INTEL inside"                                       
|   they do not say "PENTIUM inside"
    
    When the campaign began, it said simply "intel inside" inside a circle.
    
    With the Pentium Processor, "pentium PROCESSOR" is placed under the circle.
    
    With the Pentium PRO, "PENTIUM PRO PROCESSOR" is placed under the
    circle.
    
    With the Pentium processor with MMX technology, an MMX triangle is
    added above and to the left of the circle.
    
    With the Pentium II, "pentium II PROCESSOR" is below the circle, and an
    MMX triangle above and to the left of the circle.
    
    								-mr. bill

re .38
>    You get the picture, I hope. Nobody buys a PC just to have a PC. They
>    buy it because it runs the software they want. Not just *some* of the
>    software, *all* of it. 

You can't make generalities like this.  I have seen just as many people buy 
a PC because they think they have to have one and then go looking for 
software and have no clue about what can actually run on their system.  
There is no one 'profile'' that will fit *even* a large minority of PC 
buyers.

Jilly

>There is no one 'profile'' that will fit *even* a large minority of PC 
>buyers.

I certainly haven't done the research, but I think there is one element
of the profile that will fit a large majority.  The people want an Intel 
chip, likely a something-86 or one of those pentagon thingys.

so what was the point of this thread??

    The point is how Intel get into this position.
    Remember 10 years ago, Intel almost went bankrupt, if you still
    remember.
    
    bps
    

    "Intel Inside" was  a chip company with no identity creating an
    identity because people bought the package that it was in and
    identified the package as 'the thing that ran their MICROSOFT
    application".  So, by putting an "Intel Inside" on the box to run
    Microsoft, Intel wed itself to wherever Microsoft goes.
    
    Nobody tells you to buy an INTEL chip, but when you hear that little
    musical 1/4th and 1/5th (which I wonder if it stands for 4xx to 5xx -
    try it on the piano, it's a "C-F, C-G")...you think INTEL.
    
    As C_BENNETT said in earlier notes - WHO CARES about the chip.  You
    can't immitate Intel because the strategy is no longer unique and
    differentiating.  People buy the box because it RUNS THEIR
    APPLICATIONS.
    
    (If the box had wet sand in it and it ran my application I'd STILL buy
    it as long as it ran faster than the one with the INTEL or DIGITAL chip
    in it....as a user, I DON"T CARE>..I'm just trying to get my job done
    with the technology....)
    
    Technology is a TOOL, not an END.  Think like the user and you'll win. 
    Think like the traditional Digital engineer and you'll create a very
    well designed marketing program that goes nowhere.
    
    Aarugh..
    

    
    It sounds that everybody else was on vacation except you at
    Pittsburgher.
    
    			Alpha onboard
    
    			  stands for
    
    		    "Number One on board"
    
    
    	It's the IMAGE, smart !
    
    bps
    

    The problem is that "Digital" on-board won't run all my Ix86
    applications, even with FX32!.  So, I'm SOL. And, if it does, it runs
    'em slower...aside from that...now why would I want one EXCEPT for a
    VERY NARROW server market.  And there, the argument is the comfort
    factor of familiarity with Ix86 and NOT wanting to learn something
    different about firmware, booting, configuration rules etc.
    
    What's the COMPELLING reason to switch a company with a few THOUSAND
    ix86 to a server?  And, if you say speed, show me a graph with
    speed-versus-cost to show where/how the $ compare and where my
    break-even point is between ix86 and alternatives.
    
    Given that, I need to decide if the delta between that break even and
    the Ix86 break even is worth training different staff and managing a
    different set of problems.
    
    It's a NARROW space because only larger corporations think like that
    while smaller ones just skip the analysis and stick with the iX86 for
    simplicity.

>>    Technology is a TOOL, not an END.  Think like the user and you'll win. 
>>    Think like the traditional Digital engineer and you'll create a very
>>    well designed marketing program that goes nowhere.

I hope we engineers are not sitting around designing marketing programs.

						Brian

>I hope we engineers are not sitting around designing marketing programs.

Well, it would explain why our marketing stinks...

    I wish that our engineers WOULD think a bit about the marketing aspect
    of what they're engineering, i.e. WHAT is the competition doing, HOW
    much does it cost, WHAT features does the customer need, HOW can we
    implement something that is a unique differentiator that the customer
    wants and that people will pay more for etc.
    
    Engineers that think like that build products that sell.  Engineers
    that just think about better engineering, build good, reliable boxes
    that don't sell because somebody outmarkets 'em.
    
    Betamax-101 marketing..better technology, unconnected to the market.
    Marketing is NOT separate from engineering, until we learn that, we'll
    just be 2nd stringers.

>>    I wish that our engineers WOULD think a bit about the marketing aspect
>>    of what they're engineering, i.e. WHAT is the competition doing, HOW
>>    much does it cost, WHAT features does the customer need, HOW can we
>>    implement something that is a unique differentiator that the customer
>>    wants and that people will pay more for etc.

I'm not sure what engineering groups you work with, but I don't think I've been 
in any of them.  That's all we think about, and that's all I have been thinking
about for 11+ years in engineering.

bjm

    re. .49:
    
    Thanks for saying what I would like to say
    
    For all:
    
    We don't know Pittsburgher is marketing or engineering; just as you
    don't know if bps is engineering or marketing.
    
    bps
    

While I can't say .49 is wrong, its not that simple.

We need marketing to drive this company, plain and simple.  And what
that means to me is very close to what Bruce C has said, loosely,
the customers and field are number 1, everyone else supports them.  We 
(meaning everyone else) should be hearing that little ditty every single
day, in every imaginable way.  Get that ingrained into our psyche, and 
lest see what happens.

If engineering is creating a wizz bang product that noone wants or needs,
is that really all engineerings fault?  I would guess that it is the
fault of those driving this bus, (who may be engineers).  Get lots of
marketing people in charge, and then see what engineering comes up with.

    RE:. 50
    
    Brian, I hate to disagree with you, but sitting just down the hall,
    the view is sure a lot different from me.
    
    As an engineer, I've been tricked on a few occasions to think that
    I have any influence over marketing or doing what the customer
    really wants.  However, the rest of the corporation won't let
    us.
    
    Case in point, a couple of years ago, the "in" thing was to do
    QFDs (Quality Function Deployment or some such thing).  The goal
    was to collect customer input and try to prioritize it, understand
    it, etc.  At the beginning of the process I said "You know it
    will take money to collect all this input and even to bring in
    some important customers." and I hear "We don't have the money
    so we'll just make do with what we have."  So we went to MK
    for 2 days, ate donuts, begged a customer from Burlington to
    come up for 1 of the days, and organized our own mental fantasies
    into a ordered list of mental fantasies.  A total waste of time.
    
    I've many other instances where engineers have held meetings and tried
    to "crystal ball" what the customers think.
    
    So in a sense, I agree with you, we have thought alot about what
    our customers need/want.  But I think we fail most of the time since
    we do it in a vacuum.
    
    				-John

    
    "Alpha Onboard"  would have looked real nice on Luyendyk's winning
    Indy 500 car.
    

    re :.49
    
    I, and EVERYBODY in Digital, is in Sales. (grin)
    
    Actually in tech support in the network business unit mostly working as
    the 'manufacturers rep' to distributors who (hopefully) are pushing our
    network products.  I typically work with distributors and larger
    end-user purchases as well as small 'strategic' ones.
    
    And, I would dearly love ANY one in engineering to GO BUY a Digital
    product from a distributor and see the level of pain it can take to get
    it working, right, etc.  It is NOT smooth to the customer, distributor
    nor field personnel.
    
    "Great products - go figure them out yourself " seems to be our real
    motto...
    

    How about "Some assembly required; if we give you the instructions
    we'll have to shoot you." as our marketing slogan.
    
    Another favorite: "Back to the future; forward to the past; Digital has
    it now."
    
    ;-))

    re..50 and .53
    
    Personally, I think that virtually all of us are intensely interested
    in our products doing well.  Brian McCarthy said it well when he said
    that engineers DO attempt to develop things that they think customers
    will want.  But John Reagan is also right about the fact that you can't
    just guess about what people will want.  Sometimes you can do that,
    when you're trying to come up with something new.  But most of the
    time, you really need to be either visiting customers directly to find
    out what they want, or sincerely listening to market input from those
    who ARE dealing directly with customers.  The ones worth listening to
    are obviously the ones with the deepest pockets AND the willingness to
    EMPTY them for your products and services.
    
    We need to be a market driven company.  Personally, I'd like to see a
    return to the engineering excellence that we were once known for, but
    ONLY if we can make that a hallmark of what our customers see and value
    us for.  If we can do that successfully, then we can charge premium
    prices for products and services.  If we are unable to do that, we're
    going to have to carve out a niche somewhere, and most of the niches I
    see are commodities.  Those don't make too many $$$.
    
    So the big challenge, as I see it, is to define some areas that
    generate significant revenues and profits, find out what customers want
    in those areas, and make it a top priority to deliver in those spaces. 
    If we want to play in the general market, we've GOT to learn how to
    make and sell 'em there for small change, so that we can sell enough of
    'em to make something on 'em.
    
    I think it is the responsibility of upper management to see to it that
    these areas are determined, then PURSUED.  The 9 targeted markets that
    we have in our strategy seem like good matches for what we do best, but
    I have not seen a strong enough effort into pushing these strategic
    markets into our tactical sales, marketing, and engineering.  We're
    still pulling in diverse directions, as I see it, though many are
    interested in changing this.
    
    The interest that people have in talking about this and attempting to
    affect change is one reason I stay with this company.  The other reason
    is that, in spite of all that has happened, is that I like this place. 
    We still have good equipment to use, a nice work environment, and a lot
    of nice people to work with.  I still like Digital, all of this said,
    and want to give my all to making things better.  I'll continue to play
    on this team, and hopefully remain in the starting lineup...
    
    Brian  

RE: .52 
    
>Get lots of marketing people in charge, and then see what engineering 
>comes up with.
    
    
    I second the idea. The engineers started this place, and made it one of
    the premier computer companies of the planet.
    
    The beancounters took over when the engineers lost control, and made
    everyone a number, and I agree that 5 years is enough.
    
    NEXT!
    
    Let's hire some IBM marketeers to run the place next.
    
    .mike.
    

    >>Let's hire some IBM marketeers to run the place next.
    
    Psssst!  (we already have)
    

    .57 said it well.
    j
    

>    .57 said it well.

True.  But my point is that we do not have anyone
in this company whose job is to listen to customers,
a.k.a. market research, and then drive the products
in that direction.  Engineers are not trained to do
that.  Product managers have too many other things to
do it themselves, and no one to call upon to do it
for them.

We've reorganized and downsized ourselves out of the
red, but the company itself hasn't changed.  The market did.
That was just the first step.  We overspent radically
on R&D and overhead, and we needed to cut that.  Palmer
recognized that, and did a good job of getting us in line,
but that's not all we need.  The market has changed so radically
since the mid-80's that it requires sharp ears instead
of sharp technology, and we are woefully outgunned.

We need market research to drive our products.  
We don't do that now, and we NEVER HAVE.

tim

    I suggest everyone interested  begs, borrows or buys a copy of: 
    
    "The Silverlake Project, Transformation at IBM"
    by Roy A. Bauer et al. Oxford Press 1992
    
    If you can get past the (admittedly well deserved) self congratulatory 
    nature of the book you might begin to understand how you can really 
    change an organisation.
    
    IBM built a business bigger than Digital out of the AS400 in not much
    time  while the rest of IBM was in the doldrums and we were riding
    pretty high. At the time the Rochester Division was facing the chop.
    
    None of their success had to do with staff layoffs. It had to do with
    understanding who their customers were, what made them buy, what
    applications had to be on their platform (even if they were currently
    only on competitors systems), what market segments to target and what
    those segments required. They set up real customer advisory boards that
    
    
    A good lesson in how far we have yet to go and how the target has
    shifted.
    
    Regards,
    John
      
    
    
    
    
    

re .61:
>The market has changed so radically
>since the mid-80's that it requires sharp ears instead
>of sharp technology 

Well, given a choice of the two, I'd take the sharp ears, but I believe it
really needs both.  

re. 62
    
>    None of their success had to do with staff layoffs. It had to do with
>    understanding who their customers were, what made them buy, what
>    applications had to be on their platform (even if they were currently
>    only on competitors systems), what market segments to target and what
>    those segments required. They set up real customer advisory boards that

That is called marketing.  We don't do it, and unless we do, we are doomed.
Plain and simple.  And by the way, marketing is not necessarily running fancy
TV ad campaigns, unless your market research has indicated your potential
market watches TV and responds to fancy ads.  

Thanks for the book recommendation.  I hadn't heard of it, I'll be looking for it.

    In terms of books, take a look at Inside the Tornado: Marketing
    Strategies from Silicon Valley's Cutting Edge.  Anyone who'd read
    this book would know that instead of kissing off our VMS and UNIX
    customers, we should be using them as a beachhead to sell NT systems
    to as well, since we start out with (well, we had anyway) credibility
    with them that we don't have in the broader NT marketplace, and having
    NT business with these companies would increase our general NT credibility.
                               

...and that means a migration path.

I agree, but we've pissed them off so many times (our VMS customers) and have
left them stranded with our de-committment from software products that they
relied on. Many of them have left the beach and are leary of playing with us
anymore. We were saying UNIX...UNIX...UNIX....NT.....NT....NT... and they were
saying and telling us that they were "HAPPY WITH VMS" <---- and we ignored them.

RC

    re :.-1
    Yep, exactly....we commit/decommit based on our convenience and
    strategy-du-jour.  That's OK.  It's part of business.  But because we
    NEVER EVER give them a clean, transparent strategy to get from one of
    our strategies to the next - we create a tremendous burden on the
    customer to figure it out.
    
    They're tired.  Our VARS are tired.  The field is tired.
    
    So you must have super compelling reasons (i.e. it runs MY APPLICATION
    best of all) to use Digital.  The APPLICATION level of benefit must
    exceed the DIGITAL "threshold of pain" that Digital has created for the
    customer base.
    
    Great products, no operational integrity to delivery them.

    
    .-1, "...you must have super compelling reasons..."
    
            I can see a certain parallel with the french car
            maker Renault. The have the best Formula-1 engine
            in the world. Still their sales is down. I personally
            don't drive Renault. My car supplier for the last
            15 years don't even compete in F-1. But to me they
            deliver just about right performance for my needs,
            extremely good reliablility and service - and a very
            good price. Renault has to beat them on all these
            points before I would consider changing cars.
    /Ake

    To give this thread another lively twister (maybe this will improve the
    page hit rate; borrowing from web lexicon):
    
    	The other day, my daughter Aynos knocked at the door and asked
    	gentlely:
    
    "Who's inside ?"
    "Alpha" A voice inside said.
    "Alpha what ?"
    "Alpha onboard !"
    "Alpha onboard doing what ?"
    "Alpha onboard dancing with a dozen monkeys."
    "Why a dozen monkeys ?"
    "It takes many to Numa...", and the tune of numa playing at the
    			        background...
    
    bps
    
    

    
    Apparently, there are no real marketing people reading this thread of
    notes. I am somewhat disappointed and will take to the road for the
    next three weeks to contemplate on what this means. Have fun, my
    friends.
    
    bps
    

    
    
    Of course not. This conference is reserved to Digital Employees only !
    
    Sorry I couldn't help it.
    
    Michel.

Please define a real marketing person for me. 

Thanks,
Dave
UK Systems Business Marketing

    As opposed to a virtual Marketing person?
    
    Dave
    

    Actually, Bill Troy tries his darnedest to "do the right thing", and he
    keeps an ear to this.. or at least he did..
    
    but he's only 1.7e-5 of the company, and I'm sure the others listening
    who try to do the right thing in daily work life know what happens to
    such a person's workload..
    
    ...tom

Re .72:

>Please define a real marketing person for me. 

It used to be someone who avoided QUARK::MARKETING like the plague.

Now that HUMANE::DIGITAL discusses everything that QUARK::MARKETING once
discussed, I guess a Real Marketing Person would be someone who avoids DIGITAL
like the plague.


However, don't be confused - Real Personnel People have *always* avoided DIGITAL
like the plague (except when threatening the moderators).
				/AHM

    
    Thanks for .74
    
    We read many of these notes, respond to some.
    
    My viewpoint is in .3 in this string.
    
    

RE: .72

>Please define a real Marketing person for me.

RE: .73

>    As opposed to a virtual Marketing person?

No, as opposed to an integer Marketing person...

-- Ken Moreau
   who is really punchy after all the flying I have been doing in the
   last 3 days, so forgive me, please...

Re last few about DIGITAL marketing folks:

First, I have been somewhat outspoken about DIGTIAL's marketing or lack
thereof.  I sincerely do not mean to direct this at the individuals who
happen to wear marketing caps.  I question an overall corporate committment
to marketing.  I don't believe we have it, and seem to remember a published
interview with BP where he all but said he'd prefer not to need it.

Second, for those who are wondering just what marketing should be doing, or
what it is many of us seem to think is missing with respect to marketing, please
refer back to note 4913.*  If you read only one, read Ken Moreau's 4913.7 
(4913.18 is good too!).

Lastly, those marketeers who have been participating in this string, do you 
really feel DIGITAL has a committment to marketing, and being a market oriented 
company?  Do you think we are good at the things mentioned in 4913.7?  I'm not 
asking on an individual basis, I'm curious about it from a corporate level.  Do 
you think we do a good job marketing our products?

    I think the previous reply hits the nail right on the head.  I don't
    think our problem is having capable people, be it in sales, marketing,
    or engineering.  Our biggest problem is that the directions we take
    frequently do not follow the paths that the bulk of the market is
    taking.  We can argue about whether or not the market is right or not,
    but wouldn't you rather take the market's lead, and get some of that
    market share?  I certainly would, and I for one would do "whatever it
    takes" to help it happen.
    
    I see the problem as ineffective leadership, pure and simple.
    
    Brian