Conference 7.286::digital

    Why not both, since many assert that they are different ways of working.
    
    "The DEC and digital ways of working"?  :-)
    
    By the way, isn't it time for another car plan gripe or does that come
    after the gripes about people who don't return telephone calls? I've
    lost track.

the following quote is from the inside of my last paystub:

	"Digital is strengthening its worldwide brand identity
	and image.  We ask all employees to help in all their
	internal and external communications -- our name is
	Digital, not DEC."

I agree with this."DEC" may be historic, but I think things
are quite different these days.

    so who reads (or quotes) copyright statements?  The rules that are
    appropriate to copyright laws may conflict with good marketing. :-)
    
    I think the branding is a good idea, I hope that it will help connect
    us with new customers.  For all of us (and our regular customers), the
    emphasis may seem silly.  Our first impression to our new customer
    should be the most positive one that is possible.  "Digital" vs. "DEC"
    confusion is not necessary, so just say "Digital".  It also sounds
    nicer than "DEC" when spoken.
    
    Mark

   >It also sounds
   >nicer than "DEC" when spoken.
    
    I strongly disagree.  It makes one sound like one can't
    tell the difference between an adjective and a noun.  This
    is the crux of my complaint; it doesn't scan well.
                                                        

    I too think branding is a good idea. I just think they chose the wrong
    name. Like Mr. Porter, I disagree that "Digital" sounds better than
    "DEC".
    
    Laurie.

	We've been over this ground before.

	Research shows that the public will generally use the shortest
	pronounceable form of a company name. Therefore people will use
	DEC. If we insist they use Digital we will be in the position of
	a company that argues with the customer about its own name before
	it even starts asking what it can sell him. Not too smart.

	Common sense, really. If only Digital bosses could break themselves
	of the habit of deciding what's right and then telling everyone
	else. Even when what's right is breaking themselves of the habit
	of deciding what's right and then telling everyone else.

	/Tom

    I just received a package this morning (from an outside vendor)
    addressed to:
    
    		Jim Paradis
    		DEC
    		50 Nagog Park
    		Acton MA 01720
    		AKO2-1/G3
    
    Seeing as the package was addressed to "DEC" and not "Digital", I
    suppose the mailroom should've refused it and sent it back right?
    
    Pfui.
    
    Me... I'll continue to call it DEC until someone fires me for it.
    
    [maybe I oughta get some buttons and T-shirts made that say, "I still
    work for DEC"]
    
    --jim
    

    so why all the insubordinate behavior?  Your boss has directed you to
    use the proper name of the company.  Nowhere have I seen any attempt to
    control the behavior of customers.  They can call us whatever they
    want!

I don't know about you, but I have a hard time saying Digital. I've had to 
make a bunch of calls to customers today and have said "This is Jim Mickol 
from Digital" and although I've never been known to have a speech impediment, 
I find myself almost slurring the word Digital. Maybe a freudian thing...

And I've been calling us Digital since before Bob Palmer worked for Digital.

Regards,

Jim

    .11
    
    I think we should be happy that they still call us at all. 8-)

	yup, I have a similar problem........but at least it's better
	than saying Digital Equipment


	Heather

	re .11:

>    so why all the insubordinate behavior?  Your boss has directed you to
>    use the proper name of the company.  Nowhere have I seen any attempt to
>    control the behavior of customers.  They can call us whatever they
>    want!

	This reply was probably a joke, but on the off chance you were
	serious...

	Presumably this means you see nothing wrong with a situation
	where everyone in the company calls it Digital and everyone
	outside it calls it DEC?

	To put it mildly, this would run counter to principles of
	effective communication. Like, people would not have the
	faintest idea what other people were talking about.

	/Tom

	ps I have used the name "Digital" ever since we were first 
	officially told to do so - which is more than can be said
	for many employees, VPs and PR included.

	re .15:

	Reminds me of the joke about the time the Irish government
	decided to change to driving on the right hand side of the
	road. But to avoid excessive disruption, they decided to do
	it in two stages: from Monday, all cars to drive on the right;
	starting Tuesday, all buses, vans and lorries.

	/Tom

    Wonder if anyone will confuse the just completed "Digital World"
    trade show with our own "DECworld" show?  Have we lost the right
    to "DigitalWorld"?  ps Digital World show was not a Digital 
    Equipment Corp. show.
    
    Mark
    

I recently purchased a new vehicle, and the sales rep asked where I 
worked; I said "Digital." He answered, "Oh, you work at DEC, what
site?" He also asked if I would be using the DEC Credit Union, or
would I want him to finance the purchase. 

The point is, that the people who knew/know us as DEC will continue
to use that name, while the newcomers will only hear Digital, and will
use that name. Its like when you change your last name, as in marriage,
divorce, ethnics, etc., Even though you're the same person, you are 
known by one name to those who just met you, and a different name to 
those who knew you before you changed your name.

/Bob

    So let them continue to use DEC.  Let them call us whatever they like,
    just don't introduce yourself as from DEC; that's all that the wigs are
    saying.  Use the word 'Digital' to refer to the company.  What's the
    big deal?  At least they aren't calling us 'S__t-heads', ...much.
    
    8-<;^)
    
    cw

    I still have in my collection of "interesting stuff" picked up during
    my various jobs at Digital/DEC one of the original systems modules
    from the late fifties. These were circuit functions assembled from
    discrete components and enclosed in an aluminium case.
    
    On the back of this module is stamped: 
    
    		DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
    		       MAYNARD, MASSACHUSETTS
    
    while on both sides of the case is a logo:
    
    				d
    				e
    				c
    
    - "clear" letters on a dark brown rectangle, except for the top of the
    vertical stroke of the d which extends outside the rectangle and is
    itself dark brown. By "clear" I mean the case colour shows through.
    Beside this logo is an R in a circle indicating a registered trademark
    in those days.
    

    So what's going to happen with all of the "DEC" products that are
    out there today, will they become "Digital" products?
    
    Does DECwrite become Digitalwrite DIGITALwrite DigitalWrite....
         DECnet....
         DECpresent....etc.
    
    Conni
    

    RE:  .21  by CTHQ::SANDSTROM 
    
    >So what's going to happen with all of the "DEC" products that are
    >out there today, will they become "Digital" products?
    
    >Does DECwrite become Digitalwrite DIGITALwrite DigitalWrite....
    >     DECnet....
    >     DECpresent....etc.
    
    Not to worry, Conni, they will probably all be sold off to third
    parties who are in the software business who will then call them
    whatever they like.
    

    And what about all the new ALPHA products....
    
    	DEC 3000 model 400
    	DEC 3000 model 500
    	DEC 3000 etc, etc.......
    

    In this new branding campaign there is a strong suggestion that a new
    naming scheme is being worked out for many of the DEC prefix products.
    
    I join with the other comments that it is unlikely that if the company
    remains "Digital Equipment Corporation" the name that most customers
    will continue to recall will be "DEC".
    
    The great problem with being thought of as "Digital" is that where
    "digital" has any recognition it is in the concept of display (ie
    watches, clocks, etc.) and transmission (CD's, HDTV, etc.) and not
    in computing.  Even if computing really is digital, the word doesn't
    have impact.
    
    The analogy I recall are International Harvester trying to sell
    passenger cars.  Could you imagine the maxufacturers of Johnson's Wax
    making their shaving gel "Johnson's Wax Shaving Gel"? No, it's called
    Edge.

    I just met a person who was showing me around Perth.  She said, "So you
    work for Digital,  My husband uses computers from a company called
    D,E,C.  Have you ever heard of them?"  I explained they are one in the
    same and she said, "Oh do you know any of the people in Irvine?".  I
    said "California?".  Here she thought D.E.C. was just a small company
    consisting of the people she had met in Irvine.  Anyway, is seemed
    amusing to me since there has been all the talk about this lately.
    
    John

    Relating to "branding".
    
    Years ago, the Campbell Soup Co. decided to get into the spaghetti
    sauce market and tested a product in several cities.  The product was a
    complete failure and it was pulled back for a makeover.  The formula
    was not changed, just the name.  
    
    You see lots of folks were put off by the idea of buying "Campbell's
    Spaghetti Sauce" even though they liked the product in blind testing. 
    Campbell's changed the name and today "Prego Spaghetti Sauce" is a
    leading brand and contributor to the company's continued success.
    
    For us to call our products a "Digital whatever Model XXX" would put us
    into the generic world in many minds.  Keeping DEC and building on it
    would have made a lot more sense.
    
    Just MHO,
    
    Marv
    

    
    	Another example would be a group in Digital called Digital Support
    	Services, or Enterprised Integration services, or....CSS!!  If I
    	use any of the full-names-titles, there is a puzzled look on the
    	persons face, but use the term 'CSS' and "DAWN-OVER-MARBLE-HEAD"!!
    
    	-VT

Folks,

  You're all using some sort of electronic input device to take part in
this discussion.  On the front of the video tube is a corporate logo. 
I've only seen Digital printed there.  The storage expansion I have has
the same logo as does my CPU.  Every company office I've ever been to has
had the same Digital sign out front.  My business cards have Digital on
them.  Even my paycheck has the Digital logo on it.

  The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
whereever possible.  Any branding confusion has been caused by our people
using an acronym that the company, including the founder, never wanted. 
Lets stop whining and get on with life.

	Dave Brunell

  

    
    
    	Someone a few replies back mentioned research which has shown
    	"People will use the shortest pronounceable name" or some such.
    
    	I believe I read in DIGITAL Today that our marketing research
    	has shown the name DIGITAL is more widely used/accepted in the
    	market.  That's why the decision to emphasize this identity
    	and de-emphasize others was handed down.  So......
    
    	What's the big deal?  It really can't be that hard to modify 
    	such a habit. At least for employees.  It's simply NOT your
    	decision to make.  Get with the program!!   Holy smoke...
    	such a fuss about something so simple.  I can see how some folks
    	have "contributed" to the current situation DIGITAL is in.
    	Spend all your time whining about something so...so...silly!!
    
    	Maybe if we had such enthusiasm about delivering quality
    	solutions on time.....Just imagine!   ;')

    re last .28 & .29
    
    Very few people have said anything about *not* adhering to the
    corporate directive concerning Digital -vs- DEC, so you can take a
    break from the superior attitude.
    
    By and large, the discussion has centered around whether the decision
    was the best one to make.  There is nothing wrong with that.  In fact,
    if you were intellectually honest, you'd also be asking questions.  For
    those of us who truely want Digital Equipment Corporation to regain its
    place as a profitible, vibrant company asking questions and offering
    recommendations is a duty.  For those who are more attuned to toeing
    the line and marching in lock-step we represent a threat.
    
    Those that are willing to unquestioningly follow orders are welcome to
    do so.  When things come crashing down you can proudly declare, "Don't
    look at me.  I followed my orders."  while the rest of us can declare
    with equal conviction, "We tried but no one listened."
    
    Regards,
    
    Marv
    

re .30

  If you we're so busy being so self riteous you wouldn't have missed the
point.  There is NOTHING new about Digital Equipment Corporation wanting
to be known as Digital.  This is NOT a new decision.  There has just been
a realization that the rank and file has done much to cloud the name
recognition that the company has been trying for since it was founded in
1957!  Other than the color and the little circles, our company logo has
been unchanged for over 30 years!  There is nothing about being
"intellectually honest" involved here.  Digital in the past has been
willing to sit back and allow everyone to use and abuse its name.  The
fact that someone has finally woken up to the problem this has caused us
is great news!

  This company has ALWAYS wanted to be called Digital.  Sometimes, like
on a stock ticker or the back of a board it doesn't fit.  Sometimes for
ease of copyright it gets shortened when tacked on the front of a name. 
When you talk about the corporate entity, it has ALWAYS wanted to be
called Digital Equipment Corporation, or Digital.  There has been no
change ever in this policy.

    re .31
    
    If you weren't so busy being uptight you wouldn't have missed the point
    of my entry.  This is not an issue of what's new or old.  It's not
    about what the company wants or has always wanted.  The point is
    whether or not it is a good idea deciding to go exclusively to Digital 
    and banish DEC.
    
    The discussion still is centered on whether you make bold moves and
    aggressively push "branding" or whether you pussyfoot around, tinkering
    here and there by changing a dot or a color in the hope that "branding" 
    will happen.
    
    Marv
    
    

    
    RE: .29 & .31 You just don't get it.  Customers used to enjoy dealing
    with DEC, it wasn't easy, but the gear was real good and we tried hard
    and we were real people.
    
    
    
    
    Mike

    I'm still rather concerned about attempts to "brand" something that
    can't be trademarked.  Prego was shown to be a valuable trademark, just
    as Campbell's is valuable in the canned soup business.  But the name
    "Digital" is not a trademark and cannot be; only the printed form logo
    can.
    
    I don't make phone calls on American, but I do use AT&T.
    I don't wash my clothes in a General, but I do use GE.
    I don't drive  to work  in a General, but I do drive a GM Chevy.
    
    I received mail this week from someone at Digital Products Corp., "the
    leader in printer sharing".  I guess if I want a multi-user printer,
    I'll go to Digital, right?
    
    Maybe we do need a better brand than DEC, but "Digital" isn't uniquely
    ours.

And, of course, Campbell's now sells canned spaghetti sauce under the
"Campbell's" label...

>    I received mail this week from someone at Digital Products Corp., "the
>    leader in printer sharing".  I guess if I want a multi-user printer,
>    I'll go to Digital, right?
    
    Sure hope so. We make some great ones.
    
    [I've always identified myself as working for `Digital Equipment'.]

    Digital Products, some years ago, was a scam company, "operated" by
    Robert Brennan of First Jersey Securities "Come Grow With Us".
    
    Brennan is banned for life from the securities industry.

    RE: .28  by BJ6000::DAVE 
    
    >The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
    
    Digital is an acronym?  What does it stand for?
    

Damn, it grabbed its tail and left             ???????????????????

>================================================================================
>Note 2555.38                  I work for "digital"                      38 of 38
>CUPMK::AHERN "Dennis the Menace"                      6 lines   1-JUL-1993 23:35
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    RE: .28  by BJ6000::DAVE 
>    
>    >The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
>    
>    Digital is an acronym?  What does it stand for?
>    

RE:                    <<< Note 2555.30 by POWDML::MACINTYRE >>>

    Well said that man, every word. Well said!
    
    Laurie.

    I seem to recall that [one of] the problem[s] with "DEC" is that it
    *is* an acronym.  People in this conference write IBM and AT&T and
    NEC and HP and GM and GE and think that DEC is the same.  But they're
    eye-bee-em, aie-tea-and-tea, en-ee-see, aich-pea, gee-em, and gee-ee,
    but ours is dek.  If it were dee-ee-see, it would not be a problem.
    Why it is a problem is one of those obscure legal things that no appeal
    to common sense will ever change.
    
    							Ann B.

Re:   <<< Note 2555.0 by SPEZKO::A_FRASER "Mobius Loop; see other side" >>>

>        So, should the title of this conference be changed to;
>        
>                          "The digital way of working"
        
It's funny but I'd always thought that was the name of this conference, though
notes I've saved going back several years all show "The DEC way of working" as 
the title.

But then I found that EASYNOTES.LIS lists it as "Digital Style of Working" and
now doing a Notes> SHOW CONF now shows it as "The Digital way of working".

So obviously the title has now been changed (back? :-) as suggested...

-  David

Ah, so someone noticed!  I changed the conference name from "The DEC way of
working" to "The Digital way of working" about two weeks ago.  I don't know how
EASYNOTES.LIS has always listed the conference.

Paul

Re:        <<< Note 2555.43 by FUNYET::ANDERSON "OpenVMS Forever!" >>>

>                       -< Sharp eyes but a little slow >-

>Ah, so someone noticed!  I changed the conference name from "The DEC way of
>working" to "The Digital way of working" about two weeks ago.

Well I only noticed after coming back from vacation where I was completely out
of touch with notes (ARRGH!) 

I don't know what everyone else's excuse is...  :-)  :-)

-  David

>  I don't know how
>EASYNOTES.LIS has always listed the conference.

	According to my records, it's was listed as "The Digital style of
working" at least as far back as Feb 1986. At least as far as EASYNOTES.LIS
is concerned.

			Alfred