Conference 7.286::digital

    What group is going to support these applications once they're sold?

    Sally can sing.
    Bob plays the piano.
    Phil can construct the sets.
    
    Hey, kids, let's put on a play.  I'll direct...
    
    That's a swell idea.  And after it works here in Smallville, we can
    take it to Broadway.
    
    This has to be one of the most unrealistic ideas I've heard in this
    company in the last year or so.

    LIKE THE IDEA OR NOT, THIS PROGRAM IS IN PLACE.  IN FACT, AT PHOENIX
    MANUFACTURING THIS PROGRAM IS CALLED EIS (ENTERPRISE INTEGRATED
    SOLUTIONS).  THIS IS A CROSS-FUNCTIONAL SERVICE WITH A CIMLAB (USED
    TO DEMONSTRATE THE DIFFERENT SOLUTION APPLICATIONS).  IT'S OUT OF
    THE STARTING BLOCKS AND RUNNING.  
    
    AS FOR THE ORIGINAL SENDER, WHEN YOU GET AN IDEA SEND IT TO PNO
    TO SEE IF THEY CAN USE IT.  OR IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING
    THIS TOPIC YOU MIGHT LOOK TO THEM.

    Please do not enter notes in all capitals - this is considered as
    SHOUTING by the Noting community and very, very rude.
    
    By the way, this is not *the* most ludicrous idea that I have heard
    this year....but it is damn close.
    
    Lessee, what are the issues with this kind of idea:
    
    		o Quality
    		o Maintainability
    		o Serviceability
    		o Sustaining engineering
    		o Support
    
    to name but a few.
    
    If this is serious (and it seems it is), good luck, you need it.
    
    Andy

    Pat, that's the funniest analogy I've heard all year.
    
    And personally, I think you may be right, but perhaps the author
    has more concrete plans that the base note might imply.  
    
    So... (.0) is there more substance to your group's plans, or are
    we about to create a new market: Kamikaze Kode.
    
    Tell us more about your plans.  Please.
    
    

    re .0  -
    
    It sounds to me as if there is already a mechanism in place within the
    corporation to do just what you are looking for.  There is a program
    called ASSETS that sounds just like what you are proposing.  These
    products are not "standard" Digital products like VMS and FORTRAN but
    they are not "free" (really just media cost) like DECUS software is. 
    The products are tested by Digital for product conformance and
    acceptable documentation.  The products are supported by Digital too.
    
    You should be able to get more information about ASSETS from the VTX
    infobase under SOFTWARE SERVICES.  Also, if my memory serves me
    correctly I believe that Dick Rohnert (sp?) has something to do with
    the administration of this program.

        Right.  See the following conferences for more info.  Press
        <select> for BUFFER::ASSETS_PROGRAM.
        
ASSETS - European Elect. Pub.	UTROFF::EEP_ASSETS			 1757
ASSETS - European Manufacturing GYPSC::ASSETS-MANUF-EUR			 1925
ASSETS - European Office	POMPEO::EOASSETS			 1399
ASSETS - Manufacturing		MANFAC::MASSETS				 1805
ASSETS - OFFICE Market		OAXTRA::OASSETS				  642
ASSETS Network/System Europe	CLARID::EUR_NETASSETS			 2149
ASSETS Program			BUFFER::ASSETS_PROGRAM			 1692
        
Network ASSETS                  HORUS::NASSETS

    Re ASSETS:
    
    I don't know if it is still in place, but as of only a few months
    ago, sales reps were able to earn double certs for selling ASSETS
    packages in an effort to encourage them to learn more about what
    ASSETS is and how it can help their customers.
    
    fwiw
    Jon

re: .11

I think most people are concerned that the idea put forth in .0 is viewed as a
way to get additional revenue at little or no cost. ("We will write up a
User's Guide to XYZ, send it all off to SDC, and sell an XYZ system for
big bucks.") The costs required to ensure that software is maintainable
and supportable are non-trivial.  It is usually very expensive and difficult
to add these features to software after it has been written.

Unfortunately, the only 'internal' software I have come in contact with is
some of the most user-hostile software I've ever tried to use.  It would
probably be cheaper to re-develop this particular software system than to
try to make it maintainable and supportable.

Bob

My, how little we trust upper management after they take our hard earned
raises away!   8^)

Give the guy a break!   Grant these folks at least a little consideration
for knowing how to bring a software product to market, ok?  They said they
wanted to LOOK at POSSIBLE candidates for this type of program.

We often sell software with no provision for future support, if its what
the customer wants.  PSS writes the stuff all the time.  "Here you go, Mr.
Customer.  Here's your working application, written to your specifications,
and here's your source code.  We'll be happy to HELP you modify it in the 
future...just renew our contract at the proper hourly rate, and..."

It would be nice to give people the benefit of the doubt when they're trying
to do their jobs.   This isn't the government, you know!  8-)

Bob

    RE: All replies
    
    I was unable to log into DIGITAL  until  know,  nevertheless   I  was
    informed via mail that  my  base  note already had replies, even if I
    had especifically asked not  to  reply  to it.  I guess I should have
    write-locked it for that purpose.
    
    As my note tried to communicate,  but seemed to had fail to do so, we
    are  looking into the POSSIBILITY of selling  applications  developed
    for internal use.  We know of several  instances  that customers have
    seen an application of that kind and had asked  if they are for sale.
    And I already know of one case in which we  did  sell  such  type  of
    application.  I already got  names  of  about  20  applications and I
    thank again the people who sent  me mail with that information.  Keep
    sending it.
    
    We  understand that there are many things we have to look  into,  but
    nothing will happen if you don't start looking into, so.....
    
    Thanks for all comments (good, funny, and cynical) anyway.
    
    If you have additional information that could be considered of value,
    please let me know, but again, mail is preferred.
    
    Octavio

    "Internal" software tends, in many cases, to be tools people developed
    on their own time to help them in their jobs.

    Especially with a wage freeze coming up, I don't see what reward there
    is, or can be, to someone who will have to put in more effort to turn
    over a tool to someone else to "get it in shape" for sale to customers.

    I've been guilty of the "right thing" more than once, but the cost to
    my personal life vs. no tangible benefit sometimes makes me wonder
    about what "right thing" really is.

    /Peters

    re: reward to the employee.

    In most cases, there probably is none.  But if the employee
    *elects* to write this software on his own time, neither should
    it interfere with his personal life in any way.  Look at all of
    the public domain software out there for PC's; a good portion
    (majority?) of that was written for the *personal satisfaction*
    of tackling & solving a programming problem or application.  If
    there is a "reward" associated with it (financial, recognition,
    or something else), then that would be a desireable side-effect,
    but not the primary motivator.

    Not writing software on your own time to give to Digital for
    re-sale because it would interfere with your personal time is
    one thing.  But not to do it because there is "no reward" smacks
    of "fine, I'll just take my ball [coding templates] and go home".

   Jon

    There is really nothing wrong with selling a "solution" to a customer
    that is solving an "internal problem" if the customer's is the same.
    The important aspect of support has nothing to do with "internal"
    or "external". As an "internal" customer I expect a quality product
    with quality support. Isn't that the same that the "external" customers
    wants ?
    All you have to do (sounds simple) is to make sure that there is
    enough of quality support to meet higher volumes that incidently
    result from selling to "external" customers.
    What seems to create so much fuzz around this perfectly obvious
    way to make/save money is again the eternal cross-functional,
    cross-cost center, not invented here, etc etc syndrom(s).
    
    Example:
    My favorite application is supported by IS. I belong to FS.
    If sold to customers who would support it ?
    IS you said ?
    Beg your pardon, but I have no interest to allow IS to grow, I better
    make sure that FS hires the people and trains them etc etc, as my
    review is done by an FS manager etc etc...
    See what I mean ? 
    In any case, I'd say: GO AND TRY IT OUT!
    Should you be interested in applications designed to support formal
    remedial customer problem escalation over DECNET, please contact
    me off-NOTES. I know (as a user) 3 of them, but do not wish to
    comment on either in public.
    Fred

re: < Note 822.8 by COPCLU::ARNOLD "Hey, I can see Sweden from here!" >

>         sales reps were able to earn double certs for selling ASSETS
>    packages in an effort to encourage them to learn more about

   Pardon me. I'm sure my ignorance is showing, but as one who knows
   absolutely nothing about how sales works in DEC, I need to ask what
   the above specifically means. Is it something like, that sales has
   a quota (dollar figure) of sales to meet each month (or quarter, or
   whatever), and that they could satisfy this goal quicker by selling
   this ASSETS software than they could by selling standard software
   since they got "extra credit"? So, like, if I was in sales I could
   make my quota by selling half as much if I only sold this stuff?
   God - what a brilliant plan!

   I mean, I know we're a "software company" and all that (got the coffee
   mug right here - yup, yup!) but all the time I thought "EQUIPMENT" was
   still our middle name!

   -Jack

    re: -1
    
    You are basically correct on certs.  It's the primary metric of
    the Sales organization.  
        
    According to the most recent financial statement, 36% of the
    corporations revenues were from services, 64% from product sales.
    Care to venture a guess on how big the "software products" component
    of "product sales" is?  I don't know, but would be willing to bet
    your paycheck that the sum of it and service revenue exceeds 50%
    of total revenue by a wide margin.  I wouldn't expect it to get
    any smaller.
    
    Certs bonus programs for services and certain software products
    are quite common because they are considerably harder to sell than
    CPU and disk boxes.
    
    Al
    

    re: .19
    
    I think the incentive plan has a lot to do with the fact that there
    are many sales reps who have _NEVER_ sold ASSETS.  Until now, they've
    never been interested.  It's easier to sell the hardware and the
    packaged stuff, like VMS, FORTRAN, etc.  ASSETS has the added dimension
    of using SWS folk to customize the application to fit the site.
    This gives us additional SWS revenue, as well as giving us an
    opportunity to introduce the customer to the advantages of buying
    SWS time and/or projects.
    
    The bottom line, as I understand it, is to get sales folks to sell
    more than just items which can be quoted by part number.  We want
    a slice of the services business, and ASSETS can be an effective
    tool for doing just that.
    
    -- Russ

    The real bottom-line of selling assets,  (reselling products that
    have already been written) is higher profit margin. 
    
    Is that not a good enough reason!

    The ASSETS program is well alive in Europe and it provides the channel
    to sell internally developed tools and platforms to customers. We
    have quite a few examples of those sales and we see an increasing
    need as we move towards more "IS" solutions.
    In case you do not realize there are probably over 2,000 people
    within the internal DIS organization developing and supporting the
    applications; some of them may be 'user hostile', but many are state
    of the art and our customers are very interested.
    
    The VTX ASSETS library is the place to get hold of the software
    that the internal groups make available; there is a QA process to
    ensure that this software is 'supportable'
    
    In Europe we have as a goal to leverage internally developped
    applications when feasible to increase our software revenue, which
    by the way, is a MAJOR component of the company's profits.
    
    In case you wonder, I'm actually responsible for IS and SWS in Europe
    and I believe this is an excellent idea !
    
                          

    If what is being described in .0 is handled in the same manner as
    ASSETS, I'd be much happier - it certainly didn't sound like it.
    
    - Andy

    Octavio, no offense, but I still don't know what Dave Grainger is
    asking for, after reading your note twice (in here and in Marketing).
    To use a clich�, what problem is he trying to solve?
    
    Are we not having enough products to sell in the US Area and therefore
    we're looking for interesting internal tools that could be productized?
    Or are we just looking for ready-made solutions to sell to customers
    "as is" (or almost so)?  Why not use ASSETS?
    
    Have you looked at the Toolshed, for example?  Is that representative
    of the things of which we might say "Gee! If only it were for sale!"?
    If so, what's Grainger intention?  Put it into ASSETS?  I sort of doubt
    that the intention is to make such things into "real" products because
    that would involve spending money that we seem to have a shortage of,
    not to mention that it takes time to turn even one line of code into a
    real product listed in AQS.
    
    --Simon
    

    Yes, what Dave is trying to do sounds a lot like ASSETS; however,
    the ASSETS program is in Don Busick's organization, while Grainger
    runs a peer organization. What I don't understand (or rather won't
    speculate on in a public conference ) is why he is attempting to put
    into place a program to COMPETE with ASSETS.
    
    Deb

	I don't think Busiek and Grainger are peers any more!  Isn't Dave's
title "VP of Sales and Services"?  I think he's got Busiek orgs under him now.

	Perhaps Don needs to brief Dave on ASSETS!

    I believe Dave Grainger is in charge of *US AREA* Sales and Services
    whereas Don Busciek is VP of Corporate SWS...

    Both men report to Jack Shields, hence they are peers. I haven't heard
    of any organizational change that would have Don reporting to Dave.

    Deb

    Re:< Note 822.25 by HANDVC::SIMONSZETO "Simon Szeto @HGO, Hongkong" >

    Simon sent me his note  as  a  mail  message and it was answered that
    way, but I'll repeat basically what I told him.
    
    This is a revenue increase program.  So to answer  Simon's  question,
    the  problem  is,  as  we  all know, that our sales  and margins  are
    decreasing.  If we  arrive  to  the  conclusion that we can make some
    business by selling, in a  professional  manner,  what customers have
    asked for, then we think is worthwhile looking at doing it.
    
    One thing I didn't tell Simon.    Don't  think of this program at the
    same level of selling corporate software products,  i.e.    worldwide
    distribution and  support.    This  is  an  effort where we expect to
    provide more focussed  support almost on a case-by-case basis.  There
    has been situations where  a  customer  wants  a  WORKING application
    almost in an "AS IS" basis, and usually sold as a service more than a
    product, ala Assets.  And yes, we  are  in  contact  with  the Assets
    Program  Group.
    
    As I have mentioned, the response to my base  note has been abundant,
    I'll take  the  opportunity  again  to  thank  all of you who send me
    information on applications.
    
    Octavio

    Let's sell our internal SWS 'CLARS' system to the IRS for, uh, employee
    time management.
    
    karl

re .0
this is an idea that occurs in many organizations.
most never get around to giving it serious consideration.
most that think about it, decide not to do it.
most that try it, wish thay had not tried it.
some make a good business out of it.
most of those find it is more work and less profit than planned, but still ok.

the above is my impression from hearing about it for about 25 years.
i can't cite any surveys to support the impression.

a recent issue of info week had an article about for-profit MIS organizations.
several got that way by trying to sell an apparently attractive application.
most were not making much money.

dec has some advantages and disadvantages, including:
rapport with customers, established contacts, probability of being around to
support the product, high overhead, and long development cycles.

sorry, but i have no applications to suggest for CONSIDERATION.

    I can think of just one internal application that I wouldn't be
    ashamed to mention to outside world , it's STARS.

    STARS is a database system with a very easy to use and fast user
    friendly interface. It's used in our customer support centers to
    store and retrieve problem reports .
    
    If you take a popular database, like VMS , it will have several
    thousands articles. User types a question in plain English like :

    "Can I have a look at VMS 5.0 crashes with invalid exceptions ? "

    ...and database get scanned in a second or so and gives a list
    of articles matching the description.

    STARS is a major piece of TIMA ( Technical Information Management
    Architecture ) that is not an architecture ( but a product) and not
    for showing to customers you respect.
    But STARS is really good. I would wish we integrated STARS with MAILs
    and NOTES.

    There are competing products on the market, but I think STARS has an
    edge, it's simple.
    
    There is just one gotcha, there was a memo from a ( VP ? the one from
    .0 ?) that prohibited anybody from outside FS to touch it. 
    I hope that this intelligent decision could be changed in current
    situation.
    
    				Sell them STARS !!
    
    						wlodek

	there was a memo from either Dave Creed or Don Busiek, I can't pinpoint
who, that said internal application were NOT for sale, and were not to be taken
to customer sites as part of residencies.  This was before the days of ASSETS,
and was probably intended to prevent the TOOLSHED applications from becoming
support, legal, and satisfaction headaches.

	However, times change, people change, business changes!

    In a meeting yesterday between senior managers in Corporate
    Professional Services and Channels Marketing, it was agreed that ASSETS
    would be the channel to connect field software services (and ultimately
    customers) with internally used software positioned for sale.
    
    Working together, ASSETS and the new DECxport program (US focus only)
    will endeavor to bring the best marketing, distribution and support to
    activities that generate revenue for customer solutions based on
    internal use software.

    Speaking as a field SWS/support - type person, the only thing 
    that I ask is that candidate applications be THOROUGHLY checked
    out got maintainability BEFORE they are sold.  The worst nightmare
    customer situations that I have seen or even heard of involved the
    sale of ASSETS software that had no business being offered to a
    general marketplace.  The software contained code that was proprietary
    to the original customer.  The (second) purchasing customer got
    understandably upset when he ended up being billed for an almost
    complete rewrite!  Digital did the right thing and refunded the
    money, but we lost money doing it.  This (as I understand it) is
    exactly NOT the goal here.
    
    If these issues are considered well, then I think its a great idea!
    There are some wonderful applications that we have written.  Lets
    make the VMS/Ultrix/Decnet environment as fun and productive for
    our customers as it is for us!
    
    Kevin Farlee

    I have a situation I'd like some opinion on.
    
    Digital recently announced the availability of a software product
    called <x> to customers. The price tag for customers is ~$75,000.
    
    <x> was/is an internally developed product that started as a midnight
    hack (sound familiar?) and was grown and developed over a 3-year
    period. Then, another group <y> took responsibility for polishing it
    up a bit and packaging it for customer purchase.
    
    Manager <z> wants to make product <x> a part of a service offering to
    a customer. Manager <z> is shocked to find that group <y> wants to
    charge the full ~$75,000 just for manager <z> to get the package. If
    manager <z> has to pay this kind of price then he will have to nearly
    give away the service at no profit. If manager <z> prices things so
    as to make a profit here he will not get the business.
    
    My gripe here is that group <y> (rightly or wrongly) is acting in its
    own self interest. Group <y> didn't even develop <x>; in fact it's
    development costs have long since been amortized. But group <y> wants
    to use product <x> as it's cash cow and won't give *any* discount
    whatsoever to another part of Digital that would like to incorporate
    <x> into an offering to the customer.
    
    Is this any way to do business?
    
    Lee

    re: .37
    
    Without more details it's hard to be sure, but I don't see anything
    wrong with group <y>'s attitude.  Assuming the product is selling
    at its established price, and not just sitting on the shelf, it
    sounds like the service offering contemplated by <z>, which includes
    the product and is priced about the same, has little added value
    over just buying the product.  If there is little added value to the
    service part of the package, then <y> should get the profit, since
    their product contributed the major part of the value, rather than
    <z>.
    
    Also, it may be that the effort which <y> put in to "polishing it
    up a bit and packaging it for customer purchase" is greater than
    you perceive.  Sometimes this effort requires writing the documentation
    and fixing many minor bugs, then committing resources for backup
    support of the product.  While the product may well be a cash cow,
    it may also consume some of <y>'s resources.
        John Sauter

    Re .-2
    
    How about using real product/organization names. I find it really
    confusing reading about <x> and <y>. One needs context to be able to add
    value to the discussion. <x> sounds like the DECatg (Address Translation
    Gateway) product. Would you like to help us out with <y> and <z>.
    
    Dave

	The root problem I saw in .37 is that two groups are so worried
	about "their" profit that Digital's profit is going to get lost 
	in the process. This is yet an other example of metrics and "process"
	getting in the way of the companies goals and service to the customer.

			Alfred

Okay, no more mysteries...

The product is DECalert, formerly known as LANmaster. The facts I
outlined in .37 are accurate to the best of my limited knowledge.

My manager was involved in assembling a proposal for a large government
customer that includes an onsite resident for network troubleshooting
(me). My manager had/has a commitment from his management that all DEC
software products would be available to him at no cost (or low cost) in
order to support his business. He figured on getting the DECalert
product for low or reasonable cost, but has come to find that the
DECalert product is available to him a customer price only. This
obviously has thrown a wrench into the margins on this deal.

I can understand the DECalert people not wanting to give away product but
I find it hard to understand why full customer price must be paid if
someone wants to incorporate it into a custom service offering.

My guess is that the keepers of the DECalert product are being measured
directly on product revenue whereas other network-ish products are not.

Sigh.

Lee

    Is DECalert a Digital product?  I had heard that there was some kind of
    IRS rule that says (in the US) that one department/costcenter of the
    same company cannot make a 'profit' from another department/costcenter
    within the same company?
    
    Jon

    re: .41
    
    You said that your management has (or had) a commitment that all
    DEC software products would be available to him at no (or low) cost
    in order to support his business.  That's fine as long as the
    person making the commitment has responsibility for all of DEC's
    software products.  However, if the commitment doesn't reach that
    high, then the person who made the commitment was promising more
    than he can deliver.  If this is the case then most of the fault
    goes to the person who made a promise he does not have the authority
    to keep.  However, some of it goes to your manager for believing
    the promise.  
    
    If your manager had been promised that all DEC products would be
    available to him at no (or low) cost in order to support his business,
    wouldn't he have been suspicious?  ("I'd like 6 VAX 9000 systems
    please.  Better make then 440's, just in case.")  Such caution is
    also appropriate when the promise is only for software.
        John Sauter

        RE: .41

	This seems like an issue for your boss to bring up with the
	person who made the commitment. That is the person who gave
	your boss an unreasonable expectation. That person should
	probably try to work something out so that Digital gets a
	win. Possibly the higher up can get some sort of credit to
	your boss for his "numbers" and the group that owns the
	s/w can get credit for the sale of their product. Double
	credits used to be done all the time when I was in the field
	to keep everyone happy.

		Alfred

	I don't know all the details about DECalert (I probably should, now!), 
but speaking as a District-Level EIS person, close to the DM and her problems, 
I propose the following future policy:

	Metrics credit for ANY revenue from an account belongs to the LOCAL 
UNIT with account responsibility for that customer, period!  By the same 
token, those same units also must take the EXPENSES!  Expenses being 
personnel, products, etc.  Therefore, that which we nominally refer to as
"field units" worry about collecting revenue, everyone else comes up with 
something for them to sell. Those can be hard products, services, etc., but 
they must be priced attractively or the "field" won't take the expense, and 
managers will be left with "unsold inventory"!

	Now that's a pretty short solution to what may be a bigger business 
problem than I realize, but do you get my meaning?

    Just to give some insight into the world of DECalert and how it fits or
    doesn't fit into the scheme of things.
    
    DECalert is a tool that started internally and, over the last several
    years has been shown to many customers visiting the CSC/CS, as an
    example of what could be done with Digital technology.  A number of
    customers wanted the product as it was, but we (Digital) couldn't come
    up with a good delivery scheme, nor was the tool in any way "customer
    ready".  After several attempts at trying to get the tool out to
    customers, the New Ventures group took it over.  As a informational
    point, New Ventures is charged with bringing new products and services
    to market quickly, testing the marketability and either pulling out before
    too many corporate dollars are spent or exploiting (in a good sense) 
    the market and turning the product/servce over to more mainstream Digital.  
    
    New Ventures is run as a profit/loss center, hence we have to
    generate dollars to keep us in business ie we have to pay for an
    engineering staff, documentation and all of the support stuff necessary
    to provide a tool such as DECalert.  The market has, btw been very
    supportive of the product and it is beginning to sell well.
    
    DECalert has been delivered as part of a service offering and as close
    to a layered product as you can get without being one (included in the
    price is installation and hotline support).  If the local field office
    wants to do the installation, we'll even JV them expense relief for 
    providing the work.  But in either case, the customer has to buy a 
    license so we can keep developing the product as well as support what's
    out there.  Most customers (in fact I think none) have had a problem
    with buying the license and paying for a seperate service piece. 
    
    We (group y) or better known as DECalert Engineering haven't gotten to
    the point that DECalert is a cash cow, nor has the development of the
    customer consumable version even begun to be amortized.  But we are at
    the point of understanding that DECalert is something Digital customers
    want badly and that there is a great deal of money to be made by
    Digital both in software sales and service delivery.  The key to the
    delivery piece is to insure that the customer understands the added
    value being provided on top of the software license...in most cases
    they do and have.
    
    I hope this helps position DECalert.  If anyone has specific DECalert
    questions please contact me directly (TYFYS::BREWER).
    
    Thanks
    
    Bob Brewer  

    I was given a demonstration of DECalert when I participated in a
    Customer Visit last May in the Colorado Springs CSC.  It is certainly
    a slick piece of software.  I can see why we should charge a lot for
    it, since those customers who have a need for it will probably have
    a lot of money to spend on it.  According to the presentation I heard,
    it was a bargain for DEC even though we had to develop it ourselves.
        John Sauter 

Well, I think in this case my manager assumed that DECalert was just
another layered product that was readily available to him for little or
no cost... surprise!

It looks like he is going to have to check with whomever gave him that
commitment of low-cost products and see what they have to say.

Thanks for the replies.

Lee

    Sorry this is so late (I'm trying to catch up...)
    
    This brings up a good point...  Where do you draw the line on an
    On-site Service delivery consultant...  What products can he/she use on
    the customer's machines to provide the appropriate service w/o the
    customer purchasing the software?  Does this only allow LP's and not
    Assets or New Ventures?  What about items from the toolshed?  As long
    as the software is not used by the customer and is deleted when the
    resident leaves, can it be used without cost?
    
    On sites I have worked, there is usually a mixture of all.  There is
    some software that only the Digital residents use which might be paid
    for or might not, and there is the software (Assets and LP's) that the
    customer has purchased.  Network and System management are the two
    services that seem to fall into the free software trap the most...
    
    This is somewhat off track...
    
    brett

    DECalert has been sold for high profit margins by a few people in the 
    SWS Districts in the Northeast. Customers are truly impressed.
    
    For those in the Northeast who have customer opportunities and need a
    demonstration of DECalert, we not only can demonstrate it in the Boston
    ACT, but we USE IT to help monitor our computer room and notify our
    system manager (via his beeper) of system conditions which "cross the
    line" and warrant notification.
    
    Good stuff!
    
    /se