Conference 7.286::digital

Everyone is getting excited about Windows NT before the first real version even
ships.  Although some excitement about it is warranted, I feel a lot of this
interest is not unlike mentality.  It's "in" to tout Windows NT as the best thing
since sliced bread.  Although Microsoft would love to have Windows NT replace
every operating system on every computer in the world, it will never happen.

It's interesting that the group mentioned in .0 feels that Windows NT will
replace OpenVMS.  I don't think Windows NT will contain all features present in
OpenVMS.  This is certainly true at its first release, but also probably true in
the long run.

If someone said, "Windows NT will replace OpenVMS on all our desktop computers,"
then I'd be more inclined to believe them.  I hope Digital will help customers
migrate from OpenVMS to Windows NT *IF IT IS RIGHT FOR THE CUSTOMER*.  No one
gains if a customer implements the wrong solution.  Deciding to stay with a
current operating system or change to a new one should be done with some care.
I don't think most businesses who now use OpenVMS to run their business will
run out and buy the first version of a new operating system, no matter who wrote
it or sells it or how much it costs.

Windows NT is very important.  Digital cannot afford to ignore it, as we have
ignored many popular computing trends.  But let's not blindly overstate its
functionality.  I can't wait until Windows NT is actually here so there can be
a more rational discussion of its place in the industry.

Paul

    Just as it may be premature to say that WNT will replace all other
    operating systems, it is equally premature to say that it will never
    happen.
    
    The argument that VMS (aka OpenVMS) has, and maybe always will have,
    more features than WNT isn't really that much of an advantage.  Look at
    MS-DOS.  How many things does it lack?  Yet, it outsells every other
    operating system many times over.
    
    Unfortunately, our customer base is much smaller than Microsoft's and
    that will work to their advantage.  OpenVMS may be very important to
    our *current* customers but it doesn't mean much to our non-customers
    (read that as the new customers we must attract in order to keep our
    shrinking market share).
    
    Larry
    

    	Yes, and let's not make it really easy for all our existing
    customers to migrate away from everything we make money on! I haven't
    seen a business model which shows how we're going to make any money
    from WNT systems, nor have I seen one for WNT software that we're
    developing (if we're developing it). It would sure be nice if we knew
    where we expected to be making all our money 2-3 years from now and
    could put plans in place to help migrate those customers inclined to
    move anyway to those areas where we'll make money in the future.
    Nah..what a ridiculous idea!

    
.0>   The attendees included representative from  Participants Trust 
.0>   Company;  The Bank of New York; Republic National Bank; Bank of America; 
.0>   Bankers Trust; Advanced Systems Concept, Inc.; Chemical Bank; Barclays 
.0>   Bank; Chase Manhattan; Pfizer, Inc.
    
    I'm not going to say anything about Windows NT, or our plans, or lack
    of such, to support it.
    
    I would, however, like to point out an interesting fact about the
    list of attendees at this focus group. One should be aware that the
    banking industry in New York is a suprisingly close-knit (almost
    incestuous) group. Advanced Systems Concepts, Inc. (aka ASCI), as a
    developer of software for the banking industry (eg ASCI Intact -->
    DECintact), has meen a focal point in this relationship. I would
    closely scrutinize any assumptions regarding the independence of
    opinions expressed within this focus group, and given the past
    relationship of Digital with ASCI, I would watch very closely for
    hidden agenda.
    
    NT may be the greatest thing since free checking, but I would like to
    widen the genetic pool before I have this baby.
    

    re: 2210.4

    What's the point of mentioning "ASCI"?  They are a small software
    company.

    Chemical, Bankers Trust, Chase, B of NY, etc. represent represent the
    banking industry in New York.  Along with Citibank, they basically
    _are_ the banking industry in New York (ie domestic commercial banks
    with substantial retail networks).

    It is independent enough for me.

    I haven't seen a business model which shows that we're going to make
    any money from VMS systems either.

    I take the position that Windows-NT will become the most widely used
    operating system after MS-DOS and Windows.  Digital lacks any
    influence to prevent this from happening.

    If Digital cannot make any money from Windows-NT, then it may be the
    case that Digital can not make any money - period.

    
    Re .4:
    
    Never underestimate the power of a "small software company" to turn
    your life into hell on earth.
    
    The point of mentioning ASCI is that this "small software company"
    could have skewed the results of the focus group in ways mere mortals
    could never imagine, to a degree totally out of proportion to its size.
    

	Hi,

	Do you have ever read the "Repeating PC History"'s article on 
	DECprofessional press, pg104,Nov1992 (by John C. Dvorak).

	Interesting comments about Digital Alpha's strategies ...
	
	Here's a part of text ...for who not have a chance :


*	"... Digital is working closely with Microsoft in porting Windows NT
	to Alpha. Microsoft's track record for making a first release of 
	"anything" work well isn't good. Microsoft likes to get a product
	shipped as fast as possible and then improve it until it becomes a
	winner.
		Meanwhile, the customer is saddled with the buggy product that
	has to be upgraded over and over. That customers happily finance the
	company in this way is a testament to the marketing genuis of Microsoft.

		But even if NT is a bug-free hit, you have to wonder what
	Digital's position will be in the software pecking order.


**		NT will be ported to virtually every platform. Intel will run 
	it on the 586 & 686, which should be powerful as Alpha.

	Most developers will put their software on the Intel architecture 
	before even attempting a port to Alpha. If you can run the XYZ
	Spreadsheet on your $5,000 Intel-based workstation, why would you want
	to run the same thing on a $10,000 Alpha workstation ?

	Running NT on Alpha, simply put, invites comparisons.
	Digital by comparison will never look favorable on a price/perf basis.
	The company isn't set up to look cheaper than PC clones manufactured in
	a garage and sold for cost. If the machines made in the garage were junk
	,it wouldn't be a problem. But "parts is parts", and most parts are good
	parts.

***		What we're seeing is a combination of errors not unlike
	Digital's errors of the late 1970s and early 1980s. First we have the
	proprietary killer chip that will not be used to low-ball the competi-
	tion, but instead will be put in a profit-oriented box. Then we have the
	use of a Microsoft-developed oddball version of something (Window NT)
	that will be popular in another version.
		Software for this operating system will be available only from
	Digital or from a few vendors directly.
		It's unlikelythat you'll be able to walk into Egghead and buy a
	shrink-wrapped version of, say, Excel/NT for Alpha. Meanwhile, all your
	friends will be buying off the shelf.

****		Digital should rethink its strategies fast.
		And it should remember: If you forget history, you are doomed to
		have it repeated to you.
        ..."


		Personaly, I remember the PDT11/150 & RT11 ( if and only if,
		they were less expensive ... we still have the PC market today),
		and the Rainbow's history with the screwball version of MS-DOS.
		It's sound to me like yesterday !

	How do you think ?
	Just port to some reflections...and because I love my company and its
	futur.

	P_le

>		Software for this operating system will be available only from
>	Digital or from a few vendors directly.
>		It's unlikelythat you'll be able to walk into Egghead and buy a
>	shrink-wrapped version of, say, Excel/NT for Alpha. Meanwhile, all your
>	friends will be buying off the shelf.

	I doubt this very much. But concider the source. Dvorak is one of 
	those people who has never impressed me in the least.

			Alfred

    Well, Microsoft is aware of its record and has been emphasizing that
    they are testing Windows NT very extensively.  Also, Digital has
    indicated that Alpha is a family and not just one hot chip. 
    Cost-reduced versions are surely in the works and Digital is already
    establishing itself as a cost-effective vendor of PC products. 
    Further, the place of Alpha has so far been relegated to doing server
    functions within a Windows NT cluster, if that's the correct term.
    It doesn't have to be the hottest box, but it does have to provide
    long-term value and a migration path for growth.  The Intel chips are
    not at the beginning of their growth path like Alpha is because of
    their architecture.  Microsoft is breaking away from the Intel chips
    intentionally because their customers don't like being stuck with only
    Intel machines.  The alliance with Digital is placing Alpha in a
    position of choice even though there are several vendors of CPUs that
    can also be used in servers.
    
    In other words, the author of the article is greatly mistaken and
    perhaps deluded if he really thinks Microsoft and Digital aren't aware
    of the failures of the past and haven't gone to great lengths to avoid
    repeating history.  On the other hand, it may actually do us and
    Microsoft good when people are focused on areas which will be among our
    strengths this time around.
    
    Steve

    re: .10
    
>    Cost-reduced versions are surely in the works and Digital is already
>    establishing itself as a cost-effective vendor of PC products. 
    
    There is no external evidence to customers that Digital "surely"
    has price-sensitive versions in the works.  I did one of the AXP
    presentations at our announcement, and this was a hot topic amoung
    the customers (and competitors) present.  And while we have finally
    closed the gap on PC price/performance with other major vendors, we
    are in the process of splitting off a relatively small section of
    the company to keep us in that business.  The only way they'll be
    able to survive is to run without the tremendous overhead burden
    of the rest of the company.  Do you think they'll do the same
    thing with Alpha? What will the remaining %80 of the company do?
    
    You are right on one thing, a lot of the public isn't happy about
    relying on Intel CPUs.  That's why they are buying AMD and Cyrix
    clones in mass quantities.  They *don't* want to change our the
    x86 architecture, they just want lower prices.  So far, I haven't
    seen how Alpha is going to change this equation.
    
    Don't get me wrong; I think Windows-NT on Alpha is the right
    strategic move, but for different reasons.  I think it will allow
    us to open up new markets and create new solutions, as opposed to
    competing in the already-flooded PC market.  We've been sinking
    into the mire as an "also-ran" for so many years, we need to gamble
    big and try to *create* the next computer market, not just follow
    everyone else into the existing melee.
    
    Geoff Unland in Austin
    

    
    Put NeXTstep on Alpha, now!
    
    -Ed
    

    >                  -< WNT == VMS   like   HAL == IBM >-
    
    Hmm, if you're a programmer, remind me not to use 
    anything you've written.
    
    The relationship you're looking for is (in pidgin C)
    
       (IBM - HAL) == (WNT - VMS)
    
    Note that the operation mapping IBM to HAL has
    the opposite sign to the operation which maps
    VMS to WNT.  I'm not sure what this signifies.
    
    
    
    

    Arthur Clarke, who wrote the story upon which "2001" was based
    (and also co-authored the screenplay) has claimed numerous times
    the HAL-IBM connection was coincidental.  IBM provided a lot of
    technical assistance during the filming of "2001"; Clarke was a
    little embarassed when someone pointed out the connection.
    
    As far as VMS-WNT, I kinda prefer "classic VMS" and "new VMS";
    sorta like "classic Coke" and "new Coke" (can you still buy that
    stuff any more?).

Don't forget that Windows NT is a Microsoft product from which Digital receives
no profit.  OpenVMS is a Digital product from which Digital derives revenue. 
The market for and functionality of these two products is also quite different.

Paul

P.S. Whenever I see a sign for "Coke", meaning the "new" Coke, it's always
     Coca-Cola Classic.

A recent article on IBM in the UK Sunday Times quoted "loss of control over
the Operating System" as one of IBM's biggest blunders.

One of our great strengths has been control over one major OS, the Office
Document Database and Relational database all on the same platform. We look
to be losing control of all three now on our newer platforms.

I sometimes wonder whether the rich seams of profit will appear on the SI
side of the house (already subject to gross oversupply), and what
technologies we'll retreat to when it becomes obvious....

Maybe i'm having a bad day;-)
								- Ian W.