From: maklinm@cognos.com (Max Maklin)
Subject: Re: Excuse me, but isn't this 1992?
Organization: Cognos Incorporated, Ottawa CANADA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:30:25 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.144712.909@decuac.dec.com> mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. "Buddy can you spare a clue?" Ranum) writes:

	... stuff deleted ...

:^()  	Formal channels for asking for technology exist, but I personally
:^()  am not convinced that they work a lot better than USENET postings. (I am
:^()  speaking in general here, not just about Digital)  IMHO, the best way to
:^()  formally ask for a technology is to have a few million dollars out for
:^()  bid, and to write exactly what you want into the RFP. That way, vendors
:^()  will either provide you exactly what you wanted - or nobody'll bid for
:^()  your business. In general, money is the ultimate lever.

One of the better avenues that I recently was involved with is known as
CAB (Customary Advisory Board).  It was my first time for it and enjoyed
the opportunity to tell DEC what I thought they could do better as a
company in the realm of Unix, Alpha, and OSF/1.  Gail Grant I think *IS*
being successful in bringing back to DEC many of our concerns, and most of
management I believe is listening.  But as Marcus points out it's money
which prevents vendors from supplying us everything we want.

	... stuff deleted ...

:^()  	Now, all that being said - the customer is always right, and
:^()  I *agree* with you that it's reasonable to expect a working version
:^()  of a complete and relatively current version of software for one's
:^()  system. The fact that vendors have to grunt and sweat behind the
:^()  scenes to make these tradeoffs is *their* problem, not the customer's
:^()  and while hopefully my remarks above may serve to explain some of
:^()  what happens, they don't excuse it.
:^()  

I did not want to comment, nor do I wish to start a heated thread, but
I have a perspective from the customer end of why you guys do so much
grunting and sweating.  It is simply matter of increasing workload in a 
company who is at the same time trying to streamline.  With MIPS & ALPHA,
Ultrix, OSF/1, and NT, plethora of hardware, support AND service of all
DEC's products (ever look at the size of Options catalog lately, well
wait till ALPHA rolls out, going need a forklift! :)), PLUS everyone
else's hardware and software.  While I believe DEC is trying to be the
MASTER supplier of hardware and software, they can never expect to be good
at everything.  They will never have enough people or resources to keep
up with everything.  

I agree with Marcus that licensing can present some
rather unique challenges to the licensor, but their open umbrella on the
VAR business is something that really astounds me.  Heck, I got a local
guy who was my Ultrix guru and is now also my SCO guru, and who knows what
next (maybe NT).  Personally, he does a heck of job, but I think there is
only so much you can ask of someone.  Ultrix support used to be full-time
job, and I believe it probably still is.

I think DEC would be better off being "Open aware ...", rather than an
"Open vendor ...".  It is my hope that DEC does listen, whatever medium.
Many of us have a vested interest in DEC and last thing we want to see
is the talents of many of the personnel masked by a product line, support
and service structure so vast no company could ever hope of meeting their
objectives, let alone, obligations.

Max
-- 
Max Maklin                                                P.O. Box 9707 
Technical Analyst	                           3755 Riverside Drive
Cognos Incorporated                              Ottawa, Ontario CANADA
Internet: maklinm@cognos.COM                 UUNet: maklinm@cognos.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix