Conference 7.286::digital

    What I don't understand is why no-one seems to be able to explain why
    this is happening. Every single note I've seen regarding the layoffs of
    people in Internet-related areas have been suprised, confused and often
    depressed.
    
    Isn't there someone out there somewhere who can explain and justify all
    of this to us ? Someone signed the appropriate pieces of paper...
    
    By not providing some kind of public explanation, the confusion and
    depression will never end.
    
    Jamie.

    From what I understand, the security group of the Internet Business
    Unit was not touched by layoffs.  It seems that the Collaborative
    Applications Group (not sure about the name of the group) took a big
    hit.  I heard 60% of the people were TFSO'd.
    
    In trying to understand the above action, I'd say that security
    software is absoltely needed to sell the hardware but applications can
    be bought off the shelf so Digital should not be in that business.
    
    My dos centavos
    
    -David

    I saw an article in the Boston Herald that said we had laid off
    40 people in our IBG.  While I have no real comment on whether or
    not this is necessary from a business perspective, what I do
    question is the need to tell everyone about it.
    
    Obviously we want to be a player in the internet.  Why in the world
    would you announce to the world that you are laying off people in 
    this space - even if it were true?  And only 40 people no less!
    
    Do we believe that laying off people is always good news to the
    investment types?  I realize that in the past the investment 
    community has reacted positively to cost reduction, layoffs, etc.
    
    As we have seen recently, having only one answer to your business
    problems, i.e. layoffs, simply is not good news to the street
    any more.
    
    We need to grow - revenues AND profits.  News of layoffs, particularly
    in key future growth areas is not the right message to send.
                                                                   

    That's part of their TFSO package - helping them get a new job.  Now the
    competitor's dealing in the Internet Business will know that there are 
    qualified individuals available for hire, moreover, with the insights
    to build a better mouse trap than us.  We should really do them a favor
    and just print their names.  Then we can also save on the outplacement
    and unemployment services.
    
    
    	      

Another data point for Note 4749.0 by XEDON::BOGATY:

        My entire group of about 20 internet integration experts,
        formerly in the ABU, spent most of May and June "at risk" --
        at the last moment we found a home in the new Network and
        Systems Integration function in the new Services Division.

        Our approach to the internet market appears to be to sell
        servers, networking hardware, and services (and I'm not as
        sure about the latter!).

        Bob

    Alta Vista Internet Software alive and well.
    
    Lets get some information straight about the layoffs in Alta Vista.
    Eileen Lang was hired to build a profitable Internet Software business
    within Digital.  When she came in shw was handed over 600 people to
    manage.  She quickly realized that she would be unable to be
    successfull with this many people, so back in the spring she sent alot
    of the groups back to the SBU and other groups because they did not
    make sense.  We then had ~280 people.  
    
    	One of the remaining groups, web forum, had swollen to about 60
    people.  Groups from Pathworks and Mobilizer had been added to
    theoriginal Forum and Collaboration groups.  It was felt that this
    group was to large for the expected revenue.  So 22 people were cut.
    I believe most if not all of these people were picked up by other
    groups within DEC.  My group AltaVista Security was not hit at all.  
    
    It was also decided that the marketing of AltaVista would be done on
    the Internet and some people (~12) within Marketing were considered
    expendable.  (A decesion I do not fully agree with.)  
    
    The AltaVista Manager (AKA AssetWorks) was also moved out of AltaVista.
    
    Finally I have heard that the group in Australia that was doing AltaVista 
    Personal search was told that they will be let go in September.  All
    the rest of AltaVista Search development is going on on the West Coast,
    and perhaps in England.  
    
    We were told by Eileen Lang that these layoffs and moves were done to
    make sure that the ISBU would be successful.  They were NOT mandated by
    the company.
    
    Dan

>    Lets get some information straight about the layoffs in Alta Vista.
>    Eileen Lang was hired to build a profitable Internet Software business
>    within Digital.  When she came in shw was handed over 600 people to
>    manage.  She quickly realized that she would be unable to be
>    successfull with this many people, so back in the spring she sent alot
>    of the groups back to the SBU and other groups because they did not
>    make sense.  We then had ~280 people.  
    
    The story and sequence of events as I understood it (as an outside
    observer, and as a person in one of the 'displaced' groups) was that
    Ilene was hired in to head the 'Connectivity Software Business Unit'
    [see #4274] (remember the software strategy Palmer announced in Sept?)
    [see #4109], but that based upon a business review she told Palmer 
    et al that she could not form a profitable software business in two 
    years without being more focused (ie she couldn't do the job she had
    been hired in to do), and hence the CSBU was pared down to the ISBU, 
    with the discarded groups having to scramble to find new homes (she 
    didn't 'send them back to the SBU'). I was always amazed that given 
    the amount of time and effort Strecker and others put into the CSBU
    proposal, the reviews with Palmer, Pesatori, etc, and their buy in,
    that just a few short monthes after this corporate software business 
    strategy was announced it was seemingly trashed/abandoned. Look at 
    the actions taken (not the words spoken) wrt software in Digital over
    the past year and come to your own conclusions about our 'strategy'.
    
    Dave

From what I have read about Lang, she was reasonably successful in her
previous job, unlike some other VPs we have hired and fired.  I say let
her run her own show, she shouldn't be saddled with decisions made 
before her time, and possibly without true understanding of the software
business.

    It's too bad they didn't let go the marketing types who turned
    the formerly elegant and easy to use AltaVista web page into the
    putrid orange and yellow/OnSiteKnowledge mess it is now.  A classic
    example of breaking something what worked fine.
    

    What I don't get about the site is why the digital logo is so
    miniscule.

re Note 4749.10 by PADC::KOLLING:

>     putrid orange and yellow/OnSiteKnowledge mess it is now.  A classic
  
        What does the term "OnSite Knowledge" refer to, anyway?  If
        one clicks on it, one gets a page that does not mention
        "OnSite" at all.

        Bob

    Internet is not a flash in the pan for Digital, unless we allow to
    become one.  ISBU isn't our only lead story going after a huge and
    growning opportunity, and if Alta Vista continues to work well (while
    IBM has to face yet another blunder....remember "Deep Blue" a few
    months back?) Alta Vista remains a solid marketing tool.  If that type
    of search capability is so easy, where's the SUN, HP, or IBM version?
    We need to remind ourselves, and our customers that without Alpha
    there's NO Alta!!  This could easily be called "Alpha Vista" but then
    we'd be accused of marketing only one product.  We do have great
    Internet software.  We happen to have even better Internet hardware. 
    We should be telling people what a great combination we have when you
    add our software, hardware and networking products!  No one else has
    security software like our Firewall and Tunnels.  Only one Internet
    company has the security selected to protect the White House, Downing
    Street and the Kremlin, but then we can't openly share that with the
    public....but at least we can tell ourselves the good news.  Check out
    the number of ISP's (Internet Service Providers) who have switched
    platforms from SUN, Intel, HP, IBM to Alphas!  The CSS rackmounted
    Alphas are becoming the standard box by people who's paycheck depends
    on reliablity and performance on the Web.  Our VARs are seeing real
    growth and better margins when they talk about Alpha's proven
    performance compared to smaller PC servers installed running Web server
    software.  Some Flash!  Some Pan!
    
    

    re:-
    �add our software, hardware and networking products!  No one else has
    �security software like our Firewall and Tunnels.  Only one Internet
    �company has the security selected to protect the White House, Downing
    �Street and the Kremlin, but then we can't openly share that with the
    �public....but at least we can tell ourselves the good news.
    
    I hadn't heard that before! Is this not for public consumption then? If
    not are there any other major institutions that use these products that
    we could advertise?
    
    Regards,
    
    Jim

    About 5 years ago we could have claimed to be the "Only one Internet
    company" that could deliver a firewall. Now there are many, and we even
    re-sell one of them. Most of them have far more features, are eiaser to
    use, and just as secure as ours.
    
    Again, a technology we once 'owned' now widely sold by lots of
    companies in newer, better versions, and we still have our original 
    version.

    This week's issue of Computer Reseller News -- Shadow RAM section (their
    version of a rumor roundup):
    
    "DEC, oops, I mean Digital, may spin off its connectivity software business
    unit as a wholly-owned subsidiary, sources said.  A spokesman would not
    comment.  Gee, there's a newsflash."
    
    
    
    
    

>   "DEC, oops, I mean Digital, may spin off its connectivity software business
>   unit as a wholly-owned subsidiary, sources said.  A spokesman would not
>   comment.  Gee, there's a newsflash."

Who read this file besides... 8^)

	mikeP    
    
    
    
    

     What falls under "connectivity software business unit?

    > What falls under "connectivity software business unit?
    
    CSBU = IBG = ISBU = AltaVista Software
    

    The Works Councils's newspaper here in Munich mentions a rumor that
    there have been discussions about selling SI and OMS to EDS.
    
    FWIW, as of beginning of this FY, EDS fdoes the payroll processing for
    whole of DEC Germany.
    

Gee, I was going write a note called "Digital 2000" predicting that SI and 
ISBU would be sold off, and now the rumors beat me to it.

Oh, well, I was also going to predict that the VMS software business group 
would also be sold off so the company could concentrate on just chips and 
boxes.  Target population of 15,000 when all this is done.

I guess we'll see.

john