Conference 7.286::digital

    I started reading the previous note and thought Id dropped back 5 year.
    Every item stated is 1989 or 1990. 
    
    Either you got an old copy, or, as usual, we are being outsold.

Yes this is dated material.  The individual has been at one of our Business 
Partners for awhile.  I just started working with the individual on a VERY 
regular basis recently.

	Regards,

    Hold on, base noter specifically asked not for criticism of hp
    brochure, but for 10 items promoting Digital.  Get positive!
    
    He's my start:
    
    1. The only major computer company with a solid NT RISC and CISC
    strategy.
    
    2. The clear leader in RISC NT market share.
    
    3. The only company with a relationship with Microsoft covering
    engineering, service, marketing and sales (etc.)
    
    4. Consistent world record database performance on Alpha across all
    operating systems and price catagories.
    
    
    5. The only vendor who can service every piece of hardware and software
    you own, regardless of manufacturer, regardless of location.
    
    6. The only company with products that scale easily from 100 MHz Intel
    to the largest mainframes, with guaranteed upgrades available.
    
    7. We may be a hardware company, but for some reason 1/3 of our
    employees work in services - isn't service what your company really
    wants?
    
    8. Within the next 18 months Digital will have the largest number of
    Microsoft Certified Professionals of any company worldwide, including
    Microsoft!
    
    9. We deliver more Microsoft training and services than anything other
    company in the world (including Microsoft).
    
    10. When NT Clusters ship we will be the only company that can cluster
    computers under all our operating systems - guaranteeing you an easy
    upgrade path and high reliability.
    
    Obviously I'm in the NT segment, but I'm sure other groups would have
    no trouble adding similar statements.  (Digital, we make the best VMS
    in the industry!, etc.)
    
    Each of the statements above are true (I believe!) and references and
    documentation would not be hard to find.
    
    Ken B.
    Seattle
                                              

    
    	You do not need ten reasons, just three (most golfers can only
    remember their last three swings anyway).
    
    	ONE - Functionality.
    
    	TWO - Service is us.
    
    	THREE - Faster is better.
    
    
    	That's it. You add your own twists and turns depending on the
    customer, their needs, and your metrics. But you only have to remember
    the above three, and you can talk for hours....
    
    
    		the Greyhawk

        H.P. has figured out the things they stand for and 10 examples
        they want the customer to remember.
        
        They don't have ten messages for the customer to remember.  They
        have multiple instances of three messages:
        1.  Leader in openness (database, UNIX and networks)
        2.  Leader in technology (RISC,Openlook)
        3.  Safe business partner for VAR or End user
    
        They have a complicated business, but have distilled it to simple
        messages. The messages are short, self contained and easy to 
        understand.  Of course, the specific ten examples have changed since 
        1990.  I'd bet that the 3 value messages have not changed.
        
        I think the question in the base note IS exactly right.  What
        is/are Digital's value messages?  What are our 10 examples that prove
        them?
    
        This is not a typical exercise.  We excel at making simple messages 
        complicated.  The hard part of this exercise is to make our
        business easy to understand.
    
        Here is another way to look at it.  What should our customer say to
        a golf buddy about why he bought from Digital?  Use language that a 
        golfer would use.   

    

    Throw the 1989 numbers out the door.    In 1995 it seems like 
    SYSTEMS price versus performance would be a valid argument.  
    On the RELATIONAL DATABASE side graph the Tps of Oracles products
    running on our platforms.  Don't we have a jump on the competition
    in 64 bit computing?   Maybe you want to gather the current number 
    of APPLICATIONS running on our 64 platforms and graph that.  Who's
    CPU made the Guiness book of world records as the fastest CPU for the
    last few years?   
    
    .4 how does Microsoft play in the context of a dicussion of UNIX,
    relevent?   
    
    

    If the golfer approach were used, it might boil down to these three:
    
    I got the best deal - price/perfomance, price
    
    I got the fastest - performance, database performance, etc.
    
    I got the most reliable - Available Server, Clustering, Services
    
    In golf, as in sales, bluster rules and bigger, faster, cheaper is
    better (except in the the golf score of course, where truth, honor and
    the American Way rule). In this instance the analogy might better be
    about the discussion that takes place on Monday about the golf game
    from Sunday. There were great shots and putts leading to the 76 on the
    card and long forgotten were the whiffs, mulligans and"just kick it
    back in bounds" events which would have ruined the day, had they
    counted. Just write down a birdie and get on with it.
                               
    -OFWAMI-
    
    

    Can we get this notes thread to someone in marketing, copying Palmer
    et. al. on it, and get a simple message to employees to repeat like a
    mantra to everyone they run into?  .0 is right on.
    
    Send me the name of the appropriate person in marketing and I'll be
    happy to do it.  Who there would have impact vis-a-vis this kind of
    marketing message?
    
    Pat Campbell
    SI Program Manager

   re:  a few back:

> .4 how does Microsoft play in the context of a dicussion of UNIX,
 >   relevent?   
    
No.  not relevant.  Microsoft and Unix don't have much to do with
each other. 

That's the point.  HPs message is Risc/Unix, only.  Ours (if it gets
written) is that if you want Unix, get the best price/performance;
if VMS, the same;  if WNT, the same.  Choice to the customer, and
integration/interoperability of their choices.  All from a  Digital
desktop, serviced by the best in the industry.  Pretty good message.

Great idea in .0 - Now, who's going to write it up?

> That's the point.  HPs message is Risc/Unix, only.  Ours (if it gets
> written) is that if you want Unix, get the best price/performance;
> if VMS, the same;  if WNT, the same.

The problem is this *isn't* our message as far as I can tell:

    1) We *don't* have the best price/performance for NT.  (As came
       out in several newsgroup postings, the only way to get an Alpha
       that outperforms Intel machines is spend $20K.)  The same is
       true with Intel/Unix vs. Alpha/Unix (and to a lesser degree
       with others).  Basically, price/performance is a useless metric
       if you can't compete on price (i.e. if you aren't in the same
       market...)

    2) We aren't shipping "universal platforms" - instead, we're squandering
       resources (both in absolute terms and relative to the competition)
       artificially building "separate" ones for low-end WNT vs. low-end
       Unix/VMS.

FWIW - I believe it *should* be our message, but it isn't (and that's
part of the problem.)

    
    rep -1
    
    I agree on us squandering resources on building a low-end <4-5K box,
    100Mhz Alpha EV4 that still doesn't compete with a Pentium!
    
    Our market for Alpha should be in the Unix space for new customers.
    We can beat HP and Sun in the price/performance or price for that 
    matter in the 10-25K range with a box that also runs NT and VMS,
    as a bonus.  We have the only 64 bit platform that can run a 64 bit
    OS, let's exploit that!
    
    I just don't understand taking a 166Mhz Alpha chip, and choking it by
    running it at 100Mhz and then selling it for a cheaper price than the
    166Mhz.  How does choking it make it "cheaper" to manufacture, ah, it
    doesn't!  
    
    We have an NT solution that is just as good or just as bad as every 
    other vendor's, it's called Intel and it's available on the PCBUOA
    side of the house.  If we can't compete with them with Intel hardware
    on their own terms, then we can't compete with them, and if they can
    make money with Intel and we can't, there is something wrong with
    our business model.  Alpha may have a place with NT for one high end
    server, Alcor, or greater that can serve 50-100 Intel NT boxes, but an
    Alpha NT box on everyone's desk, I don't think so.
    
    The way we should sell Alphas in the NT space is that we sell Unix and
    VMS machines, and if you buy one, you get an NT license for free!
    I think it's silly that we are taking up Engineering time,
    manufacturing space/time, marketing time, our time, to build
    a product that Yes is fast, but, No, is way too expensive and 
    still is constrained to NT only, Native Alpha NT, doesn't run
    Windows 95, doesn't run WFW.  And we are losing money by selling
    them for 1/2 the price of their "full" speed siblings.
    
    Intel sold DX33s because they didn't bin out at 50Mhz, they sold DX25s
    cause they didn't bin out at 33, etc.
    
    A pentium 75 doesn't run at 90, period.  Intel didn't take a Pentium
    150 and choke it to 75 and sell it for 1/2 price, but we should do that 
    with Alpha?
    
    I liken taking an 166Mhz Alpha, running it at 100Mhz and then running
    NT on it, to buying a Ferrari, striping out the engine and putting it
    in a go cart, and selling rides on it for 2cents a ride at the fair.
    Sure it goes fast, and customers are buying a ride for next to nothing,
    but we lost a $200,000 Ferrari to make it possible.
    
    If you sell a million workstations, and you lose $10 on each one, my
    math says you've lost $10 million dollars.  But somewhere someone is 
    happy because we've gained marketshare.  You bet.
    
    I try not to get emotionally involved with Alpha, but when I patently 
    disagree with the direction Alpha and NT are going it's hard not
    to get a little heated.
    
    Just my $.02  
    From a former Alpha Personal System's employee.
    
    /art

>  Alpha may have a place with NT for one high end
>    server, Alcor, or greater that can serve 50-100 Intel NT boxes, but an
>    Alpha NT box on everyone's desk, I don't think so.

Unix isn't going to gain market share long term, and will probably see
significant erosion in personal systems.  Where exactly do you think
we will get enough revenue to sustain Alpha investment to keep it
competitive, particularly relatively to Intel?

>    If you sell a million workstations, and you lose $10 on each one, my
>    math says you've lost $10 million dollars.  But somewhere someone is 
>    happy because we've gained marketshare.  You bet.

If you don't sell enough, ISVs will tell you just how important your
platform is...  People *still* seem to think that we can sell hardware
and ignore 3rd party software.  This is not 1970.

    
    	And to reinforce that idea (re:-1) on the field sales force, we
    compensate them for hardware revenue two ways (product specific
    spiff AND budget attainment) over all other product sets.
    
    	As a matter of course, third party software is considered
    goodness only if they have an existing relationship with Digital
    and especially as a hardware reseller.
    
    	Naturally, the more you need more reps specializing in each
    component of a "system sale" - that way everybody can get in everybody
    else's way delighting the customer no end :-(
    
    	What is discouraging is that it isn't getting any better out here
    and good reps are quiting weekly...
    
    
    		the Greyhawk

    Well, I'm sorry to see this note degenerating into operating system
    wars.  But, it does neatly demonstrate the depth of the problem:
    Digital does not have well stated (simple, concise, catchy) benefits and 
    values to capture the hearts and wallets of our customers and
    prospects.
    
    Good thing we have great products.
    
    BTW, I've re-read the base note, I don't see where it said anything
    about being UNIX specific.  You want to compete with HP, NT is a pretty
    good way to do it, since they haven't got a clue.
    
    Finally, as near as I can tell, there is no one person who should be
    doing this for the company.  Each business unit has its own marketing
    group and then there's a separate advertising group.  Sounds like part
    of the problem...
    
    ken b. 
                                                             

UNIX/WINDOWS/NT integration is not talked about very much, yet
Digital Equipment Corporation is in the best position to provide
synergy between these two platforms.

IMO, this is our weakest message.  OpenVMS integrated with NT is great
news for our install base...so is 7.0 on Alpha for that matter, that is
if the customer is one of those that had enough vision to migrate to
the Alpha Architecture back when you had to VEST over just about everything,
and their software vendors did a port.

If your a new IS customer or an old one with an initiative to implement
client/server...you go to MS and they'll tell you NT and Win95/WFW...they'll
even push SAP on a two tier architecture...sans UNIX...go to HP and its
UNIX and Win95/WFW...another two tier architectural scheme...go to IBM,
and get ready to get *really* confused...we have an incredible offering
with a three tier client/server capability.  As usual, our technical position
is clearly best-in-class.

We are the only vendor in the position to really *push* UNIX/WINDOWS integration
solutions with cradle to grave service and support...we are the only vendor who
can *truly* be aloof from the UNIX/NT wars and sell *both* of their strengths
relative to our offerings...we should highlight our initiatives to make UNIX
easy to manage, easy to install, and just plain easier to consider...there is
a tremendous fear around UNIX relative to the cost of running and supporting it.
We should move to alleviate that fear, and provide Windows based management
tools to help those customers who know they need high performance UNIX but
just don't want to have to join a cult...

*Ironically, Microsoft ITG needs high performance UNIX more than they know*

So for me, it's *only* three reasons:

1.  The most comprehensive, scalable, systems architecture based on
industry standard componants and the Intel and Alpha chipsets for an
unprecedented upgrade path and clustering capability, backed by world class
service and support.

2.  The most compelling UNIX/WINDOWS integration story with exceptional high
performance UNIX and impressive price/performance NT systems *both* Intel and
Alpha.  Not to mention commodity priced desktop PC's built with the same 
standards and care that our high-end systems are.

3.  The OpenVMS Affinity program which highlights Digital's commitment to
our customers investment protection and Digital's commitment to provide a clear,
supported upgrade path, ensuring that our customers are *always* in the position
to compete and *win* in the global market place.

Jest my $.02

-Stephen

Re: .-2

To say "HP doesn't have a clue" WRT NT is just plain incorrect; look at
the facts:

HP's NT strategy is based on the Intel product family.  Currently HP
ships considerably more PC product than we do, including more servers.

I would bet HP actually "sells" more NT licenses than Digital does,
combining both our Intel and Alpha NT sales.

HP is a Microsoft Enterprise solution provider - just like Digital.  Hp
can deliver this support world-wide, just like Digital.

We emphasize our "relationship" with Microsoft, HP emphasizes their
"relationship" with Intel.

We are showing our cumulative corporate ignorance looking at a
competitor so simply as to say "they don't have a clue".  Clearly it us
lacking a clue.

--------

Re: .0

If we update the data in these HP messages we find HP has actually
become stronger in many of these metrics since '90.  Moreover, HP has
grown substantially larger than it was in 1990.

The key to this level of marketing is to identify the differentiators we
can provide that meet a couple of critera:  (1) they can be verified
through the use of outside sources (2) they actually present a
meaningful advantage to our customers.  These should be the basis of our
corporate messages - product messages need different approaches.

    re. 12
    
    "We have the only 64 bit platform that can run a 64 bit OS, let's
    exploit that!"
    
    I am not sure that Digital marketing can exploit anything.  Look at the
    December 18 issue of INFORMATIONWEEK, page 108, "The Push To 64-Bit
    Systems."  Yes, Digital is mentioned many times in the article, but
    so is IBM, HP, SGI, and SUN.
    
    NO WHERE does it mention that Digital is the only one with both the
    64-bit chip and OS and NO WHERE is VLM mentioned.  No mention of the
    new TPC records.
    
    I find it hard to believe that Digital, eight months after the TL
    announcement and two years after Digital UNIX on Alpha, has not been
    able to get the message or information across to a magazine such as
    INFORMATIONWEEK.  This is absolutely pathetic marketing.  
    
    There is no way you can exploit your products if you can not get your
    message across.  

re: .-1 

Hi "J",

	I would urge you to write the Editors of Information Week to comment on 
their article's "ommissions" (or "commissions" depending on how paranoid you 
happen to be ;-).  If you want the word to get out (outside of this Digital 
Notes Conf. that is...)  - "Just do it!"  Don't wait for a Marketing VP to 
do it for you...

Dennis - who as you, have had my criticisms of Digital Marketing but 
	 after seeing how NDD is now handling our "message", am beginning 
	 to change my tune...

Personally, I think our marketing is beginning to turn around...

There are still some things that absolutely infuriate me..like
'Sunday only' television ads...when our competitors do otherwise...

And our advertising budget...which is probably too small for our
revenue, compared to other companies.

On the other hand, I really do feel that there has been some listening
going on...some sharp minds have come up with our ad campaigns...so
I feel much more supportive these days...with some caveats.  Our television
commercial, while not aired enough and in the right spots in my opinion,
is very sharp...very polished...and really does turn some heads...it
conveys the confidence of a very successfull company, as oppossed to the
mentality of a company trying not to die...

One thing I wonder if we realize is that there is a battle waging for
mind-share within the industry itself, and IBM SUN HWP and CPQ currently
hold a clear, distinctive, advantage over this company in that space.
When we do play the game, we get recognized...but I feel that we play
this game rather half-heartedly...and we gain mindshare for a while...then
quickly lose it.  Some people don't place importance on 'trade-rag' exposure,
but that person isn't me...

Anyway, in general, I believe we have started to change our marketing ways,
and I want to encourage those resposonsible to keep it up...and to grow
the initiative...we need it.

-Stephen

    
    Combine .16 and some from .10, plus throw in strong
    "Digital is financially solid and growing...", then I think 
    getting someplace. My additions:
    
    	Leader in Enterprise-Wide Commercial 64-bit RISC Database
    	Environments:
    	--- The only vendor capable to support your VLM and VLDB 
            whether it is Oracle, Sybase, or Informix  
              --> throw in top 8400 specs here
    	--- Leadership tpc-m price-performance
             -->  throw in all the latest tpc-m accolades here
    	--- Leader in WNT SQLserver performance and price-performance
    	    -->   throw in latest tpc-m numbers here - hey, they are
    	          hot
    	--- Get testimonials from SAP and other KEY bigname commercial
    	    ISV's AND 3-4 bigtime 8400 customer wins.
    
    
    FWIW, I relayed and warned the powers-to-be in 1990-1991  on HP's
    sales, marketing (direct & indirect), product and technology 
    strategies and implications to Digital (HPwas then an $18B company)
    but they weren't ready to hear the messages :-(  Still have my
    presentation slides!!! Oh well...
    
      - Ashikin
    
    	
            

    
       also,  advance file sytem for our UNIX !!!
    
      much faster re-boot times/recovery
    
      online backups    etc.....
    
    

Which takes us back to the original point...a concise distilled
message about why a customer should do business with Digital is
difficult to convey.

Even for us arm-chair marketers.

P^)

    
    ..how about...
    
    
    We own 100% of the VMS market.
    
    [please don't forget these (long suffering) punters, as we make up our
    '10 reasons' list].
    
    Rgds,
    
    AW.
    

    r.e .18
    
    "We have the only 64 bit platform that can run a 64 bit OS, let's 
    exploit that!"
    
    Them have AS/400 on Power with OS/400??
    and, just to get picky
    Them have CRAY T3E on Alpha with Unicos??
    
    In fact, didnt IBM have the unique distinction of having a 64 bit OS
    running on a 32 bit platform?
    System 38, first generation AS/400?
    
    

    I saw an ad for a new Sun workstation in the recent CGW.  Something 
    like an Ultra 1.  In the ad, Sun claims 64-bit.  It certainly implied
    next generation and was obviously competing with the Alpha.  Is Sun
    waking up to 64-bit or is it more smoke and mirrors.  Regardless, the
    placement of the ad certainly will convince readers that there's
    another 64-bit machine available for rendering besides the Alpha.
    
    Steve 

    Sun have 64bit chips but are relying on DG for a 64bit OS.

In re: other 64 bit machine

I saw an ad the other day for a motherboard upgrade for some $2,300
dollars to get a MIPS based 64 bit machine AND Windows NT. Ad suggested
you could save a lot of components from your previous PC. That same
PC magazine had zero ads for Alphas. 

>Per

    There is an excellent presentation in development within Mike Gallup's
    (VP Systems Marketing, SBU) organization.
    
    It is called "The Alpha Story" and it addresses 5 of the most common
    questions we are asked by analysts, our competition and customers:
    
    1. Can Digital afford Alpha?
    2. Can Alpha sustain industry leading performance?
    3. Is Alpha attracting the applications required to run your business?
    4. Will the Windows NT market have a positive impact on Alpha?
    5. Does Digital's dual platform strategy make sense for customers?
    
    This presentation has been reviewed with key industry consultants
    including C. Gordon Bell (inventor of VAX, now at Microsoft), Andy
    Feit (Dataquest), Andrew Allison, Linley Gwennap (editor-in-chief at
    Microprocessor Reports), and Owen Brown (CEO of Migration Software).
    
    I've seen a preview copy of the presentation and it is excellent.  I
    believe it will help answer some of the questions raised in the replies
    to the base note and will help the base noter with (at least 5) good
    reasons to buy Digital.
    
    The goal is to get this presentation posted to VTX IR in the next
    couple of weeks.  Please be on the lookout for a Reader's Choice memo
    which will provide all the details about how to get copies.

    
    re .29 - note, though, that this is a "defensive" campaign, while
    our competitors mount "offensive" campaigns.
    
    len.
    

    Understand that this presentation was drafted by request of Bob Palmer
    who had received numerous letters from our account managers and
    customers who claimed that the Alpha story was not playing well in the
    field.
    
    The issue was not Alpha performance- few of our competitors will pick a
    fight with us on performance.  The issue was survivability.  Our
    competitors, (namely HP and IBM), some members of the media, and some
    analysts have tried to convince our customers and prospective customers
    that Alpha cannot survive and we cannot continue to invest in Alpha
    because Alpha does not have the volume required to sustain continued
    investment.
    
    There are several ways to use this presentation.  But the most
    important thing to keep in mind  regardless of how you use it  is to
    not make it a defensive message.  There are lots of very positive
    messages within the presentation.
    
    You don't need to present the entire story.  You can choose to use the
    question most appropriate to your customers/audiences concern.  One
    recommended tactic to use is to invite a group of customers to get an
    update on Alpha and where we are  3 years after announcement. 
    Acknowledge that there are a lot of preconceived notions about Alpha
    some correct, some incorrect and you are there to set the record
    straight.  
                                     

    Check this out for a consistent msg:
    
    1   Digital's AlphaGeneration supports 3 of the most Open Operating
        Systems Today! WindowsNT, UNIX, and OpenVMS.
    
    2   We have the most scalable (read portable application, investment
        protection,) 64 bit systems Today!  This means you can develop
        applications on an entry level Alpha, and roll out your production
        applications on a larger Alpha without expensive software rewrites.
        Just more performance!
    
    3   Digital is the world's leader in open client/server solutions from 
        personal computers to integrated worldwide information systems. 
        Digital's scalable AlphaServers, and AlphaStations, combined with
        the industry's best open storage, networks, software, and
        Multivendor Customer Services, together with focused business
        partner solutions, helping you compete and win in today's global
        marketplace 
    
    
    4	Check out our WEB page www.digital.com for you non believers, re: a WNT
        AlphaStation 233/266 MHz, the Alpha XL, Born to run WindowsNT for under 
    	$10K

    Haven't been ignoring this note entry.  Just getting back from 5 weeks
    in Asia and 2 weeks in Hawaii.
    
    I found a piece of literature in my archive:
    
    	OpenVMS Systems - Ten Reasons to Buy One
     1. Open Standards Availability
     2. Delivering Open Systems Benefits
     3. Multivendor client/Server Integration
     4. Excellent Data Integrity, High Availability
     5. Leadership clustering
     6. Over 2,500 Applications on OpenVMS AXP
     7. Leadership Performance and Price/Performance
     8. Setting the Pace in Business-Critical Client/Server Computing
     9. A Favorite Platform for Mainframe Downsizing
    10. A Family of Three Alpha AXP Operating Systems
    
    Anyone know who created this? GREAT graphs, charts, illustrations, and
    messages.  I'd like to get the .PPT file and modify it to be more
    current and reflect some of the messages from previous responses.
     
    EC-F3131-93 Rel. # 119/94 04 72 50.0
    
    Anyone interested in working on this.  I have spare copies that I can
    send to you to take a look at.
    
    	Regards,
    

    Search query just came back from VTX IR, took awhile as I used the *.
    
    Looks like a pretty good start...nodes not available so i can't get the
    file - UGH!
    
    	Regards,
    
    
    OpenVMS Systems -- Ten Reasons to Buy One (Infosheet)           Info Sheet
    
    DATE POSTED: 10-MAY-1994    LAST REVIEW:  1-AUG-1995    LENGTH: 0006
    Pages
    
       PART NUMBER: EC-F3131-93                     AREA OF USE: AP/EUR/U.S
    
    DESCRIPTION OF CONTENT:   This Infosheet describes the top ten reasons to
    buy OpenVMS Systems...open standards availability, delivering open systems
    benefits, multivendor client/server integration, excellent data
    integrity/high availability, leadership clustering, over 2,500 applications
    on OpenVMS AXP, leadership performance and price/performance, new
    innovations, a favorite platform for downsizing, and investment protection.
    
    GENERAL CONTACT            GENERAL CONTACT
    JACKIE JONES               NANCY WITTING
    
    MSBCS::JONES               MSBCS::WITTING
    
    FILE NAMES     BYTES/BLOCKS    DESCRIPTION
    LI00VBPF.PDF   518480/  1013 Adobe Portable Document Format
    LI00VBP8.PS   1558122/  3044 PostScript Document for any Digital Printer
    LI00VBSC.TXT     9112/    18 English Language, ASCII document
    

    Just found something to add to my "Why Choose Digital"
    
    Host E-Mailboxes Worldwide
    (estimates as of Dec. 1995, in thousands)
    
    Vendor                      Mailboxes	Share 
    DEC ALL-IN-1/MailWorks	7,000		23.6%
    IBM OfficeVisioin           6,000           20.2
    Fischer TAO                 3,000           10.1
    Verimation Memo             2,500            8.4
    Uniplex Mail                2,160            7.3
    HP OpenMail                 2,000            6.7
    HP OpenDesk                 1,500            5.0
    WangVS Office               1,500            5.0
    NBS Systems TOSS             650             2.2
    Data General CEO             500             1.7
    Others                      2,900            9.8
    			       ------	       -----
          Total Host           29,710          100.0%
          Percent U.S. based   17,825           70.0
    
    			CommunicationsWeek February 26, 1996 pg. 9
    
    Your're welcome to review this document and I'm looking for feedback. 
    If you have something beneficial I'd be interested in looking at it.
    
    	Regards,
    
    	 kam
    
    TENNIS::SYS$PUBLIC:WHY_BUY2.PPT

    
    Umm...
    
    That mailbox thingy is quite misleading. It represents HOST mailboxes.
    Why they lump MailWorks into that mainframe/host catagory is beyond me.
    The real story here is LAN mail connectivity, or LAN based mailboxes.
     The big three here are Microsoft, Lotus and Novell.
    But, did you know we are still a significant holder of X.400 market
    share? Something on the order of 30 - 35%. Next closest is *other*.
    So, that X.400 thingy plus number of E-Mail boxes can tell a nice
    connectivity story.
    
    -Mike Z.
    

    I agree, but we're just looking for statements indicating DEC is #1.
    But since you asked here's the rest of the information:
    
    How E-Mail is Distributed
    
    Worldwide E-Mail Installed Base
    (estimates as of Dec. 1995, in thousands)
    
    Type of Mailbox	Total		Share		U.S. Total
    Lan			47,300           52.0%		33,125
    Host                29,710           33.7           17,825
    Public              13,950           15.0           11,150
    Total Mailboxes	90,960          100.0           62,100
    
    LAN E-Mailboxes Worldwide
    (estimates as of Dec. 1995, in thousands)
    
    Vendor			Mailboxes	Share
    Lotus cc:Mail               9,100		19.2%
    Microsoft Mail              9,100           19.2
    Novel GroupWise             5,500           11.6
    Lotus Notes                 4,500            9.5
    SoftArc FirstClass          4,000            8.5
    Microsoft Exchange Inbox    2,500            5.3
    On Technology Da Vinci      2,500            5.3
    EE Software QuickMail       2,200            4.7
    Banyan Vines Mail           1,500            3.2
    On Technology Notework      1,000            2.1
    Other                       5,400           11.4
    Total Worldwide LAN        47,300          100.0
    Percent U.S. based                          70.0
                        

  I'll have to profess ignorance, but I don't understand the last
  few replies *AT ALL*. What is a "Host based mailbox"? What's a
  "Mailbox"?

  (I ask because the numbers all seem astonishingly low. And where
  are the Unix systems? And how do we count them? Pine, Elm, etc.?
  Or Solaris, AIX, SCO, etc.? And where are the commercial services?
  By some counts, AOL might have as many as 3,000,000 accounts * 5
  screenames per account. And where are the Macintosh mailers?)

  Could someone explain to me, in general, what we're talking about
  here?
                                   Atlant