T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1190.1 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Wed Sep 19 1990 02:06 | 2 |
| Go to CD ROM completely - cut the costs of documentation to DIGITAL by
50%+!
|
1190.2 | 50% | REGENT::WOODWARD | | Wed Sep 19 1990 09:27 | 9 |
| CD ROM? How are the folks in the field supposed to read it?
RE 0. I'm in doc'n too. I don't think we can cut 50% of our
printing costs. Especially in technical documentation.
We already limit our costs by using DEC STD 073 and limiting
ink colors, fancy covers, etc.
I can see how to cut 50% from marketing materials and those
glossy quarterly reports though!
|
1190.3 | Get a BIG knife :-) | AKOV06::DCARR | Too bad we cant vote the DEC ins out | Wed Sep 19 1990 09:46 | 16 |
| Think of the big picture... How many of you receive those irritating
weekly Ed Services one-page color propaganda sheets? Couldn't we
survive without them? If I want to take a course, couldn't I look up a
catalogue in VTX and enroll?
True, you couldn't go completely to CD ROM without first outfitting the
receiving organizations with CD readers - but aren't we supposed to use
what we sell here?
I _do_ believe that we can cut 50% out of documentation costs (and as
someone that has written specs seemingly all their life, I wouldn't
mind if I didn't have to write so much, follow every DMR page, etc..).
Of course, I believe you can cut 50% out of almost anything...
ML
|
1190.4 | | DEC25::BRUNO | IMT: We Document the World! | Wed Sep 19 1990 10:14 | 8 |
| Go to CD ROM completely and wipe out all of the savings by having
to provide everyone with the equipment to read them? Not a wise move.
Depending upon which piece of equipment the person needed, the IEG
freeze might prevent them from acquiring it. Then, we're back to old
fashioned paper again.
Greg
|
1190.5 | | ELWOOD::PRIBORSKY | Don't bother me, I'm busy making tomorrow yesterday, today | Wed Sep 19 1990 10:15 | 22 |
| Re: .3: and using what we sell.
Yes, this is true. But in order to put CD readers everywhere, we'd
have to buy them from IEG, and IEG orders have been sliced.
It's another Catch-22.
I agree about the training blurbs sent on heavy grade paper to everyone
in DEC. Let's use electronic means for that stuff. I get an average
of two training announcements per week via MAIL. VTX could cover the
rest. I doubt many people are "trained on impulse" which is what those
mass mailings are for anyway. If I want a course, I search it out
because I need it.
There is a select subset that will still need to get paper
announcements. Let's target that class and reduce printing costs and
save a few trees.
And, while we're at it, what we do print for internal consumption
should be printed on recycled paper. It really irks me to get this
stuff printed on glossy paper. Using recycled paper will save
printing costs too...
|
1190.6 | | KOBAL::DICKSON | | Wed Sep 19 1990 10:50 | 10 |
| I'm all for reducing the size of our documentation. We could start by
changing the doc-styles so there isn't so much white space. That
should reduce the page count around 20%. (The VMS manuals are
particularly bad this way.)
Next time you see a VMS doc set being delivered (on a fork-lift truck)
take a look at the shipping label to see how much it weighs.
I refuse to have one in my office. And I don't see many people around
me ever looking into their sets.
|
1190.7 | My thoughts exactly | GOLF::WILSON | | Wed Sep 19 1990 10:52 | 20 |
|
Geez, they stole my cost cutting suggestion that I was about to send in.
As a prime example of printing waste, I have on my desk a copy of a cost
cutting memo issued by John Sims on Sept. 14th. It is a 3 page memo, and
by the time it filtered down to me through VAXmail, it had 6 pages of mail
headers and distribution lists. That combined with the mail flag page and
the blank page at the beginning and end of the print job, it took 12 sheets
of paper to print the 3 page memo. If one quarter of the company's employees
print a copy of this same memo with the same amount of wasted pages, that's
approximately 270,000 wasted pages for one memo!
Now normally I would just read most memos on the screen, rather than
print them. But by the time I've hit return 3 or 4 times and still
haven't reached the text of the memo, I'll just issue the "print"
command and read the hardcopy of the memo after it prints. There's got
to be better method of distributing information with less waste. Even
without printing these memos, the 6 pages of headers and distribution
lists take up disk space, which ain't free either.
Rick
|
1190.8 | sheehs! | SAUTER::SAUTER | John Sauter | Wed Sep 19 1990 11:12 | 7 |
| re: .7
You, and people like you, could avoid waste by having more patience.
Printing a 3-page memo, even if it required only three sheets instead
of 12, wastes much more of DEC's resources than you hitting the return
key an additional 3 or 4 times.
John Sauter
|
1190.9 | Progress | DICKNS::MACDONALD | VAXELN - Realtime Software Pubs | Wed Sep 19 1990 11:45 | 25 |
| The cost of manufacturing documentation that supports Digital products
is enormous. Those costs, if reduced, can result in increased revenue
for the product lines. I don't believe the intent is to reduce the
value of product documentation by cutting out chunks of potentially
useful information, but rather to reduce the cost of producing it.
Publications groups across Digital have taken steps to reduce the cost
of writing books and to minimize (if not eliminate) documentation as a
risk factor in meeting time to market goals. Those efforts continue
with the development of new electronic tools for writing and art, new
programs like demand printing and electronic film mastering, and of
course the online documentation disc.
The OLD disc is certainly a step in the right direction, but the
corporation has barely scratched the surface (no pun intended) of the
potential market for electronic forms of documentation. Not everyone
has access to a DECwindows capable terminal, and not everyone is
willing to sacrafice that margin and white-space for scribbling notes.
As the BookReader evolves and as DECwindows becomes more popular on the
desks of customers, I would expect to see paper documentation as an
option rather than the CD.
-Paul
|
1190.10 | Trade-offs | BOLT::MINOW | Cheap, fast, good; choose two | Wed Sep 19 1990 12:27 | 37 |
| There are some interesting trade-offs involved here (and worth more study
than this brief note can give)
-- CDROMS have a capital investment of about $500 (retail) + host computer
resources. Each ROM costs about $1000 to master, and $1/per rom to
make. We could probably dump all of our engineering publications on
CDROMS monthly. The long-term savings (over paper + printing + shipping)
are significant. (I would guess that our VMS doc-set costs run about
5 cents/page in manufacturing costs, by comparison -- can anyone give
a better estimate?)
-- On the other hand, reading technical documentation through a 24 line
window is next to impossible, and we'll end up printing manuals one
at a time through laser printers. This might still end up cheaper,
as the specialist will only print one or two pages (chapters?). Most
specialists have never opened half of the five-foot shelf VMS documentation.
-- Perhaps a better solution is to re-think our documentation so the
actual information is presented in small (one page) self-contained
units. The Unix V6 "manual page" approach has turned out to be
extremely useful. "Hypertext" (where text is combined with indexing)
may be another useful mechanism -- look at the Emacs online help for
one approach.
-- This leads us to overall engineering design: if we decide to do our
engineering documentation in "one page" units, we may have to re-think
the way we design systems, rejecting the VMS Swiss Army Knife approach
in favor of the Unix "small units with well-defined interconnections"
design. I think the overall VMS design philosophy, for better or for
worse -- is responsible for the bloated manual set.
Unfortunately for the cost-cutting people, you can't just decide to cut
printing costs until you understand the real source of those printing
costs: anything else (replacing glossy paper by newsprint), while admirable,
is not a long-term solution.
Martin.
|
1190.11 | One Internal Documentation Group's Solution | JOKUR::BOICE | When in doubt, do it. | Wed Sep 19 1990 12:33 | 31 |
| Standards and Methods Control (SMC) will distribute its first "quarterly"
CDROM on October 1st. This CDROM will contain many Digital standards and
other related documents in readable and printable formats. SMC will be
adding many more EL-class documents in subsequent releases and also plans
to add optional readable formats (e.g. VTX-like, Bookreader). This first
CDROM release will cost $30.00.
Over time, SMC hopes that the use of this CDROM (by reading the electronic
files online) will significantly reduce Digital's costs associated with
printing, distributing, and maintaining hard copy internal documents.
The user interface on this CDROM is similar to SMC's videotex system. All
software needed to run the CDROM application is on the CDROM, however,
Version 5.3 or higher of VAX/VMS is required. Character cell terminals are
fine to use with this product. DECwindows is not necessary. (Please note,
also, that in an effort to eliminate outdated information from being accessed
and used, the indexing application on the CDROM won't be usable after
15-March-1991.) The CDROM is compatible with Digital's line of CD readers,
the RRD50 and RRD40, but not with PC-based CD readers.
If you'd like to know more about the SMC CDROM (what it contains and how to
order it), please first read EL-CDROM-00, "User's Guide to Digital Standards
and Related Documents on CDROM," which can be ordered from SMC VTX for no
charge. Instructions:
$ VTX SMC (or use the Keyword "SMC" from the Corporate Videotex Library)
Press: PF1 7
Use Keyword: EL-CDROM-00<return>
Choose Option 1 to begin the order process.
Or, just order EL-CDROM-01 for the CDROM itself.
|
1190.12 | | STAR::ROBERT | | Wed Sep 19 1990 12:59 | 22 |
| As long as folks insist that improved solutions replace all previous
solutions and do so without any change to previous behavior then the
effort is so handicapped as to move at a snail's pace.
We should put on CDROM what we can put on CDROM for those who can
use it, on whatever display devices we can reasonably accomodate.
You don't need a CDROM player at every desk!!! You need them at crucial
points in the network. You can use the network, local disk, tape, and
other methods to heirarchially distribute information.
We should avoid printing when we can. When we must we should avoid
excessive flag/burst/trailer pages. We should fix our mail products
to drop name lists where they are not wanted needed.
In other words we should do all these things and more, and we shouldn't
hold up some of the better ones (like CDROM) because a subset of people
who can't use it on day one can be identified.
Evolution, not revolution.
- greg
|
1190.13 | | COOKIE::LENNARD | | Wed Sep 19 1990 13:11 | 12 |
| Has anyone asked our customers whether they want documentation
delivered via CDROM? Like microfiche of 15 years ago, it's a slick
little technology with limited usefulness. Where it works, fine,
but let's not let the techno-weenies drive the business.
I agree that someone should stop the Ed Services mailings. That is
one of the most visible wastes in the Corporation. I also looking
right now at a very large, pink, high quality FY91 calendar printed
on expensive poster paper. These are printed by the thousands, and
NO ONE needs them. What is required is a documentation/printing
czar with absolute authority to pull the plug on any and all unneeded
documentation. Fat Chance!
|
1190.14 | More thoughts | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Writing Services | Wed Sep 19 1990 13:29 | 25 |
| We are in a dither because there has been absolutely no clarification
of what "printing costs" are involved. Internal printing costs?
Customer documentation printing costs? All printing, like from LN03s
or LPS40s? What? My group specifically has concerns because we don't
have direct control over printing costs. For us, the SSB is our direct
customer; they in turn hire the printer.
If we assume the memo means what it says, we are to print fifty percent
fewer pages. I do not know if customers will like some of the things
we may have to do. If I were implementing it, I would first stop
giving engineers and reviewers paper copies of customer manual drafts.
I would also stop using second colors in customer documentation, so
they can go onto CD-ROMs without translation. (Of course, color is the
most popular single feature of our manuals, and customers are adamant
about our keeping it, but the heck with them 8^( I might also go more
aggressively into the CD-ROM only mode of distribution, with printed
manuals available only on request (like water in a California
restaurant), but, as Mr. Lennard observes in .13, I'm not sure anyone
has asked customers if they really want that from us. I do know that
IBM distributed System/38 user information only on line, but those
customers demanded the return of printed books (!).
Is the seemingly laudable answer "we've already reduced our costs"
going to work when we've been told to reduce fifty percent MORE?
Pray tell, more than what?
|
1190.15 | MAIL megabucks | BTOVT::CACCIA_S | the REAL steve | Wed Sep 19 1990 14:10 | 13 |
|
re: A few back (PRINTING MAIL)
unless you want to read all those headers why not just ext/noheader
edit the file just created to delete the extras and then print the file
locally or better yet at the mail prompt instead to pushing return
just type EXT TT and the message will scroll through with no stops.
DEC mail coming to the house is a waste. Why not just send in inter
plant and save the $ postage. Better yet post what it might be in a
notes file (where it is more likely to be read or on VTX.
|
1190.16 | | TOPDOC::AHERN | Dennis the Menace | Wed Sep 19 1990 14:42 | 9 |
| The easiest way to cut printing costs 50% would be to only print every
other page. In fact, you could improve on this percentage if you
printed only even-numbered pages, because you sometimes have a blank
verso at the end of a chapter anyway.
Of course, if you accept the fact that documentation is part of the
product, this method could cost us a lot of sales. But hey, when did
Digital ever let customers tell us how to run our business.
|
1190.17 | ship the product...it needs no docs! | REGENT::WOODWARD | | Wed Sep 19 1990 16:07 | 7 |
| I like .16's idea!
>But hey, when did
Digital ever let customers tell us how to run our business.
But, hey, when did the customers ever read our documentation?
|
1190.18 | I could do without... | MSBCS::KING | | Wed Sep 19 1990 16:17 | 9 |
| I've been getting alot of stuff over the network as far as training
goes which I think is a good idea! Including course confirmations and
cancellations from DIS Training in Bedford. I wish the Field Service
training/seminars and DIS Training/seminars would stop coming on paper.
Its usually met with a remark like "Oh boy another class I won't be able
to take" by people in the office. So it immediately gets deep sixed in
the circular file.
Bryan
|
1190.19 | Means What he Says | COOKIE::LENNARD | | Wed Sep 19 1990 16:39 | 19 |
| I believe that when Mr. Smith talks about cutting printing costs by
50%, that is exactly what he means, i.e., the cost of actually turning
out the printed products. I'm surprised at the number of people who
claim to be in the documentation business, who think that means
reducing the page count by 50%. That won't do it. "Set-up" costs
don't change, front and back matter and covers and tabs still have
to be done, assembly remains about the same, etc. This is all mostly
independent of page count. In my ten years of experience in pubs with
DEC, the size of the job is usually the biggest single cost element.
Low-volume runs, with subsequent reprints, is very expensive. I've
seen a lot of low-volume initial runs in my time either out of poor
planning, but also to make the budget look good. This is because
the funder usually pays for the initial printing...but not for
follow-ons.
The name of the game is to get really good at forecasting, but also
to simply get rid of a lot of the junk we presently are inundated
with.
|
1190.20 | Back at'cha | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Writing Services | Wed Sep 19 1990 16:45 | 3 |
| Anent .17 (Woodward): They start reading our documentation as soon as
they realize they're not getting their tasks done because they tried to
get away without reading our documentation 8^)
|
1190.21 | Nope | STAR::PARKE | I'm a surgeon, NOT Jack the Ripper | Wed Sep 19 1990 17:08 | 11 |
| Re .20:
Nope, those guys call Colorado, or the Engineer for whatever their
problem is that they saw at themost recent DECUS (I have recieved
a couple of "IYou don't knoe me but I saw you at DECUS <whever> and
I need to know how to ......"
U gotit
Bill
|
1190.22 | Re .21- Some day I going to learn how so smell, soelll, (oh da*n) spell | STAR::PARKE | I'm a surgeon, NOT Jack the Ripper | Wed Sep 19 1990 17:09 | 0 |
1190.23 | Yes, I wish people WOULD start asking the customers again | STAR::ROBERT | | Wed Sep 19 1990 17:30 | 28 |
| > Has anyone asked our customers whether they want documentation
> delivered via CDROM? Like microfiche of 15 years ago, it's a slick
> little technology with limited usefulness. Where it works, fine,
> but let's not let the techno-weenies drive the business.
Customers have asked for this at every DECUS for over five years,
in very large numbers. It got standing ovations when it was announced.
It was the busiest booth on the demo floor two DECUS's running. It
has been one of the most popular DECwindows demos. Apple has complimented
us on the implementation. Microsoft, HP, IBM, and others have announced
copycat programs. Many major customers have repeated asked for it, asked
for character cell versions, asked for additional features, asked
for ... (in other words it is requested and discussed a lot).
Need more?
- greg
PS: the real problem is DEC used to be a center of advanced computing.
It was one of the reasons I joined. Terminals, networks, "WOW".
Nowaday, ugh, we're crude and old fashioned. Still printing paper,
using character cell terminals, it's terrible --- we're backward.
And now we're paying the price because we've designing products
based on internal audiences when half of our customers have moved
beyond us. People did things on PCs five years ago that still
can't be done on the average DEC internal configuration.
|
1190.24 | Think BIG - how bout 100% reduction? | AKOV06::DCARR | Too bad we cant vote the DEC ins out | Wed Sep 19 1990 17:49 | 31 |
| Good points in -.1.
I'd like to add another point in response to a tongue in cheek reply or
two: good - and I mean REALLY GOOD - software should not need a manual
at all!
OK, that's a blanket statement, and I realize that some software for
some reason seems to just HAVE to be complicated, but OUR goal in
software development should be to make it completely usable WITHOUT A
PAGE OF HARDCOPY DOCUMENTATION!
Online, artificially intelligent help (particularly if it reading off a
CD, for example, for speed) CAN take the place of documentation. As
to those that say the users will never use on-line help - HOGWASH I
say! They'll never use BAD on-line help...
In fact, I've been playing with the Mac outside the company for a few
months now, and I have never read a manual, and I am able to survive on
it! (I do have an expert next to me to answer questions, though).
Also, have you ever seen a user manual for an arcade game? And some of
them have some pretty complex logic paths... No manual. (Yeah,
Nintendo has a little pocket one, but it doesn't tell you everything,
and lets you figure it out as you go.)
That's the kind of cost-cutting we need; those brought about through
permanent changes in philosophy - not the penny ante hack and slay that
will be forgotten about when things turn around!
JMHO,
Dave
|
1190.25 | | KEYS::MOELLER | DEC-rewarding successful risk takers | Wed Sep 19 1990 18:26 | 6 |
| The DIGITAL TODAY internal newspaper - there's less than 40 people in
this facility, but we get this box with 100 copies. Every, what, two
weeks we're drowning in the stuff. I can have one for my office, and
one for home, and one for...
karl
|
1190.26 | Rising to the bait | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Writing Services | Wed Sep 19 1990 19:09 | 6 |
| Non-trivial software requires documentation. I own a Mac too, and "get
by" without documentation in many cases. But try FullWrite
Professional or WORD or Studio 8 or some of the other products of great
power and endless features without a manual and you'll see what I mean.
Digital write complex software.
|
1190.27 | DIGITAL TODAY, RIP | DEMING::WILSON | | Thu Sep 20 1990 02:57 | 21 |
| A couple of points -
DIGITAL TODAY could disappear from the face of the earth at no loss
to anyone I know! We hardly need another propaganda rag. The only
question is how to recycle those niftly little racks.
If everyone that printed out mail on a LPS40 set the number_up to 2,
that would save 50% of the paper used. And I too can't believe how
many people seem to print out their entire mail files regularly.
But let's get real here - I didn't see Jack Smith's memo, so maybe I
will eat these words, but I get the impression from the base note that
this is another edict: cut printing costs by 50%. What are the
indications that we spend double what we need to on printing? What
gyrations will we go through to meet an arbitrary figure? Sure, every-
body knows there's waste and mismanagement, and we all want to help.
But, I'll sure start feeling better when I stop hearing how Jack Smith
said this or that, and when I start hearing how Jack's staff, or his
staff's staffs are begining to implement change.
John Wilson
|
1190.28 | Digital has it now. | TOPDOC::AHERN | Dennis the Menace | Thu Sep 20 1990 16:55 | 4 |
| Seriously, the demand printing solution that we demo'd at DECworld is a
great way to cut overall printing costs by avoiding the excess printing
of documentation on low volume products.
|
1190.29 | All You Have To Do Is Ask | SLSTRN::PLOETZ | | Thu Sep 20 1990 18:01 | 12 |
| If you are experiencing a problem with the distribution of "digital
today", we would like to know. There is an account set up for such
requests. SALES::NEWS, or NEWS @ OGO.
Re: .27 - FYI "digital today" was put in place as a response to a
request from Ken Olsen. Our editorial policy is one of "no review", so
I am unclear as to why you regard the publication as "another
propaganda rag." We do our utmost NOT to publish propaganda. If you
can point out where you see it, please let us know.
Thanks,
Paula
|
1190.30 | Award winners | TLE::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Thu Sep 20 1990 18:59 | 33 |
| Re .10:
>-- This leads us to overall engineering design: if we decide to do our
> engineering documentation in "one page" units, we may have to re-think
> the way we design systems, rejecting the VMS Swiss Army Knife approach
> in favor of the Unix "small units with well-defined interconnections"
> design. I think the overall VMS design philosophy, for better or for
> worse -- is responsible for the bloated manual set.
Recall the following marketing slogan by Robert Praetorius:
VMS - there's a long list of arguments for it
Re .16:
> The easiest way to cut printing costs 50% would be to only print every
> other page. ...
Ha-ha.
As I recall, at ZK there was a ruling from on-high against buying non-Digital
laser printers. Otherwise we could have had a few Xerox 8700-style printers 5
years ago (MR did), instead of many more smaller printers. The 8700 prints
double-sided - LPS40s and LN03s can't. The software for the 8700 made it a
little easier to print double-sided 2-up than any n-up on the LPS40. And the
8700s were visibly more reliable to boot. Smart move, eh?
(There are some LPS20s in our machine room which can print double-sided, but
they were installed for the writers and as I recall, engineers have been told
not to use them (much). I don't think they want us degrading their print
quality, or something).
/AHM
|
1190.31 | Start internally | CHESS::KAIKOW | | Fri Sep 21 1990 19:08 | 4 |
| We can start by getting rid of the redundant and/or unnecessary internal DEC
publications. A merger of some would be in order. For example do we really need
both Digital this week and NH view in their present forms? Why not merge them?
Note that both are distributed at ZKO, guess that says sumptin??
|
1190.32 | Why the focus on printing costs? | COOKIE::RJOHNSTON | | Fri Sep 21 1990 20:38 | 46 |
|
Having read through all the notes previous, I'm bemused that:
o This whole discussion is pretty much around cutting "printing"
costs as opposed to overall documentation costs.
o Only a few replies have even hinted at why we need documentation:
(ideally) to increase the likelihood (sp?) that people ** can do
their jobs as effectively as possible. **
o No one has mentioned that you can't measure the quality of
documentation by page counts.
o No one has pointed out that probably a good portion of our
documentation (note, not just printing) costs are due to writers, editors,
and illustrators having to clean up (and in some cases actually write)
engineering specs before they can tackle the customer documentation.
The particular culture of a given engineering dept. will prevail, and
if the culture does not mandate well-commented code and updated specs,
then our documentation costs will continue to be high.
o No one has admitted that the various documentation groups around the
company are just as guilty as other organizations of having deadwood,
doing or re-doing jobs that don't need to be done, and protecting
their turf: there's a HUGE investment in the status quo.
o No one has mentioned the role that good old project management can
play IF it's properly applied.
o No one has mentioned training and using new documentation methods
as one way to bring down documentation costs or to increase revenue.
And I'm not talking spelling and grammar classes. I'm talking about
learning and applying methods such as structured documentation,
storyboarding, and Information Mapping (this list was not
all-inclusive).
Acknowledging environmental concerns (and at the risk of making some
people angry), paper is cheap compared to peoples' time and the disasters
that poorly written documentation introduce to business. (Yes, the hardware
and software are also to blame, but this note is about documentation.)
Printing costs are a symptom of a much, much larger problem.
Rose
|
1190.33 | | QUARK::LIONEL | Free advice is worth every cent | Fri Sep 21 1990 21:54 | 33 |
| Re: .31
ZKO is unusual in getting both New Hampshire View and Digital This
Week. The origin of that is that initially ZKO was populated largely
by people moving up from Tewksbury and Maynard, and many people still
had ties to Massachusetts, so there was a request to provide DTW
in addition to NHV, which at that time (and still today) didn't
really include ZKO in its scope.
I would consider these types of publications to be among the more
valuable. The ones I wish we could get rid of are the ones that
I can't get OFF of the mailing list for. I do admit though that
the situation is much better today than it was five years ago, in
that I get far fewer useless publications than I did then.
Re: all
I am all in favor of CDROM as a way of reducing our publishing
costs, and so are customers who bear the brunt of the high prices
we charge for our documentation. No, it's not for everyone, but
with CDROM I now have available to me at my desk the manuals for
dozens of products whereas before I was lucky if I had an up to date
VMS docset. (I can finally read the NOTES manual, for instance!)
The technology is still in its infancy, but it is here now and is
useful now, and will only get better. It won't entirely replace
paper, but it will, in time, dramatically reduce our use of paper
and will conserve trees. (Have you ever seen the statistics on how
many trees were cut down to print the VMS V5 docset? It's
frightening!)
Steve
|
1190.34 | | REGENT::POWERS | | Mon Sep 24 1990 10:02 | 17 |
| re .30: double sided, reliable printing; n-up
DEC now offers a line of desktop laser printers that includes a duplex (two-
sided printing) model. This is the DEClaser 2000 family, offering ANSI-style
and (optional) PostScript support.
How much easier can n-up be? It's one parameter with an argument on the
/PARAMETER switch to PRINT (as is duplex/simplex selection), and the
selection of these parameters can be folded into your redefinition of
your usual PRINT symbol.
Try two-up duplex for normal reading, and 4-up duplex for material you scan
as opposed to pore through (large NOTES extracts and such).
...but yes, reduce (by streamlining) the amount of stuff there is to read...
- tom]
|
1190.35 | CD ROMS: the price just went up | BOLT::MINOW | Cheap, fast, good; choose two | Mon Sep 24 1990 11:52 | 22 |
| re: .10:
CDROMS have a capital investment of about $500 (retail) + host computer
resources. Each ROM costs about $1000 to master, and $1/per rom to
make.
Oops: I was thinking of an Apple marketing program and got the numbers wrong.
The program is a one-time offer to get developers interested in creating
CD-ROMS. For $1,500, you get
100 copies of the CD ROM
of up to 550 Mbyte (Apple disk format)
10 day turn-around
2-color artwork on the CD
The offer is through three CD ROM mastering houses: 3M, Philips, and Sony.
The $500 cost is a heavily discounted quantity-one price for the Apple CD Rom,
and probably fairly close to their wholesale price. Retail prices are running
around $800 per drive.
Martin.
|
1190.36 | How much easier can it be? | TLE::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Mon Sep 24 1990 13:00 | 31 |
| Re .34:
>How much easier can n-up be?
$ print me:login.com/l132d
>It's one parameter with an argument on the
>/PARAMETER switch to PRINT (as is duplex/simplex selection), and the
>selection of these parameters can be folded into your redefinition of
>your usual PRINT symbol.
This is my reward for trying it now:
"
$ print me:login.com/parameters:(page_orientation:landscape,number_up:2,sides:2)
Job LOGIN (queue LPS40, entry 912) started on LPS40$PS2
$
%LPS-E-PARSYNERR, Syntax error in the /PARAMETERS qualifier at or near PAGE_ORIE
NTATION:LANDSCAPE
$
Job LOGIN (queue LPS40$PS2, entry 912) terminated with error status
%SYSTEM-F-ABORT, abort
$
"
I think I understand what all the problems are, so you needn't waste time
explaining them. However, neither am I going to waste time dealing with them
as I print things from time to time. I have more important tasks whose tools
incessantly demand my time for workarounds every bleeding day.
/AHM
|
1190.37 | any change costs a little bit at first | REGENT::LASKO | Tim Lasko - PCIBU VIPS HCEFWSW | Mon Sep 24 1990 14:35 | 8 |
| Re: .36
>I think I understand what all the problems are, so you needn't waste time
>explaining them. However, neither am I going to waste time dealing with them
>as I print things from time to time. I have more important tasks whose tools
>incessantly demand my time for workarounds every bleeding day.
But you have time to post "ad machinum" attacks in DIGITAL? :-)
|
1190.38 | | COOKIE::LENNARD | | Mon Sep 24 1990 15:27 | 6 |
| 'fraid I agree that DIGITAL TODAY can go away. It has rapidly become
another propaganda rag with mandatory articles by senior management.
I somehow thought it was going to be different....maybe KO did also.
But then, I haven't seen it for several weeks out here (CXN), so maybe
it's already gone.
|
1190.39 | printed ? on *paper*? ridiculous ! | HEFTY::CHARBONND | Free Berkshire! | Tue Sep 25 1990 08:08 | 3 |
| a) put DIGITAL TODAY and the other house organs online;
b) train *every last employee* how to access it;
c) make sure they get the time each week, month, whatever to do so.
|
1190.40 | One Unsatisfied Customer | TLE::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Tue Sep 25 1990 09:51 | 6 |
| Re .37:
>But you have time to post "ad machinum" attacks in DIGITAL? :-)
Value my differences, Tim.
/AHM
|
1190.41 | | SELECT::GALLUP | Walk right thru the door! | Wed Oct 03 1990 17:56 | 22 |
|
I was psyched to get a notice in internal mail asking me if I
wanted to continue to be sent the Office Applications Flyer.
However, I was NOT psyched to see that I actually had to RETURN
the notice, thru internal mail, in order to no longer receive
the flyer.
Wouldn't it be more efficient to return it if you DO want to
continue receiving the flyer? I wonder how many people saw the
notice and threw it away thinking "great! I'll no longer get
it" without reading the fine print?
Hummmmmmmmmmm..............
kath
|
1190.42 | | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Wed Oct 03 1990 19:50 | 8 |
| RE: .41
I want to know why they wanted my mailstop and job code on the form to
terminate the flyer. They don't need the mailstop if they aren't going to send
me anything any more, and my job code is none of their business, or if it is,
they can ask Personnel for it.
--PSW
|
1190.43 | | QUARK::LIONEL | Free advice is worth every cent | Wed Oct 03 1990 21:39 | 4 |
| Better still, ask why they needed any of that when their printed
mailing label was attached to the form!
Steve
|
1190.44 | REdundant Information | TRCC2::BOWERS | Dave Bowers @WHO | Thu Oct 04 1990 10:52 | 21 |
| This strikes me as another specimen of my favorite DECfoible - the redundant
information request.
It seems to me that 90% of the information I'm asked to enter on DEC-internal
forms could be determined instantly by anyone who had my badge number and
access to a simple personnel database. Think about it. How many times a day
are you asked to provide your badge number and one or more of the following:
Mail stop
DTN
Email address
Area/district/Unit (for field personnel)
Cost Center
Cost Center MAnager's name
Job classification
Considering that we are (or at least should be) one of the most thoroughly
automated organizations going, why can't we get enough integration to do away
with this unnecessary replication?
-dave
|
1190.45 | | TAGART::DONNELLY | Joe Donnelly, LES PBU, Ayr | Fri Oct 05 1990 05:30 | 11 |
| re: Badge numbers
Your badge number can change (and you don't need to leave the company
and re-join to make this happen).
I have two badge numbers (although only one is active at any time).
My original one was changed when I transfered from the sales sub.
to manafacturing. Since then, I've moved back into the sales sub
(and used my original number), and back into manafacturing (and
now use my second number).
Joe
|
1190.46 | Every little bit helps ... | CYCLPS::PILGRM::BAHN | The 1st 2K lives are toughest! | Sat Oct 06 1990 22:37 | 119 |
|
For what it's worth ... the users that I support (system manager) do a
lot of development with VAX DOCUMENT. Often, users need to check parts
of a module or book. Although it IS possible for DOCUMENT to produce
PostScript files that represent only part of the output of an SDML file,
many users find the process to be complicated and/or tedious.
A couple of months ago, I hacked out a pair of command files that will
print page-to-page from a complete PostScript file. The routines let
the users process a whole module or book, but print only part(s) of it.
I've attached the command files to this reply. The first is
PAGE_PRINTER.COM. It's purpose is to provide a relatively simple way
for users to submit the second, PAGE_PRINTER_BATCH.COM, as a batch job.
The batch job:
o creates a temporary page-to-page PostScript file
o prints that file on the printer that you designate
o deletes the temporary file
So ... here are the command files to do with as you will. I make no
excuses for style or efficiency nor the lack of either ... nor can I offer
any support. Feel free to use the routines if you like and to modify
them in any way that suits your circumstances. (You WILL need to change
or DEFINE the logical name SYS$TOOLS that I've used in PAGE_PRINTER.COM.)
Enjoy,
Terry
P.S. If you're fortunate enough to have access to a VAXstation, the
DECwindows CDA Viewer in VMS V5.4 lets you display PostScript
files on your monitor.
================================================================================
$! PAGE_PRINTER.COM
$!
$ AskSource: IF P1 .NES. "" THEN GOTO AskFirst
$ INQUIRE/NOPUN P1 "Source File? "
$ GOTO AskSource
$ AskFirst: IF P2 .NES. "" THEN GOTO AskLast
$ INQUIRE/NOPUN P2 "First Page? "
$ GOTO AskFirst
$ AskLast: IF P3 .NES. "" THEN GOTO PrintSymbol
$ INQUIRE/NOPUN P3 "Last Page? "
$ GOTO AskLast
$ PrintSymbol: IF P4 .NES. "" THEN GOTO DoIt
$ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Printer Control?"
$ INQUIRE/NOPUN P4 " (PS40, PS03R, PRINT/QUEUE=..., etc.) "
$ GOTO PrintSymbol
$ DoIt: P5 = F$LOG("SYS$DISK")+F$DIR()
$ SUBMIT/NOLOG/QUEUE=SYS$BATCH-
/PARAMS=("'''''P1'","'''''P2'","'''''P3'","'''''P4'","'''''P5'") -
SYS$TOOLS:PAGE_PRINTER_BATCH.COM
$ EXIT
================================================================================
$! PAGE_PRINTER_BATCH.COM
$!
$SET PROCESS/PRIOR=3
$SET DEF '''''P5'
$ext=F$LOC(".",P1)
$IF ext .EQ. F$LEN(P1) THEN GOTO ne
$P6=F$EXT(0,ext,P1)
$t=F$TIM()
$P6=F$EXT(12,2,t)+F$EXT(15,2,t)+F$EXT(18,2,t)+F$EXT(21,2,t)+"__"+P6
IF F$LEN(P6) .GT. 39 THEN P6=F$EXT(0,39,P6)
$t=P6+".TMP"
$f=P1
$GOTO fd
$ne:f=P1+".PS"
$t=P1+".TMP"
$fd:P2=" "+P2+" "
$P3=" "+P3+" "
$OPEN/READ s '''''f'
$OPEN/WRITE o '''''t'
$ES=0
$w1:READ/END_OF_FILE=ew1 s l
$WRITE o l
$IF F$EXT(0,10,l) .NES. "%%EndSetup" THEN GOTO w1
$ES=1
$ew1:IF ES .NE. 1 THEN GOTO e
$ffp=0
$flp=0
$wi=1
$w2:READ/END_OF_FILE=ew2 s l
$cf:IF F$EXT(0,13,l) .NES. "% DefineFont:" THEN GOTO nf
$wf:WRITE o l
$READ/END_OF_FILE=ew2 s l
$IF F$EXT(0,2,l) .EQS. "RP" THEN GOTO cw
$IF F$EXT(0,1,l) .NES. "%" THEN GOTO wf
$GOTO cf
$nf:IF F$EXT(0,7,l) .EQS. "%%Page:" THEN GOTO cp
$IF F$EXT(0,11,l) .NES. "%%DOC$Page:" THEN GOTO cw
$cp:IF ffp .EQS. 1 THEN GOTO clp
$IF F$LOC("'''''P2'",l) .NES. F$LEN(l) THEN GOTO sw
$wi=0
$GOTO w2
$sw:ffp=1
$IF P2 .EQS. P3 THEN flp=1
$wi=1
$GOTO cw
$clp:IF flp .EQS. 1 THEN GOTO ew2
$IF F$LOC("'''''P3'",l) .NES. F$LEN(l) THEN flp=1
$cw:IF wi .EQ. 1 THEN WRITE o l
$GOTO w2
$ew2:wi=0
$w3:READ/END_OF_FILE=ew3 s l
$IF F$EXT(0,12,l) .EQS. "EndDVC$PSDoc" THEN wi=1
$IF wi .EQ. 1 THEN WRITE o l
$GOTO w3
$ew3:CLOSE s
$CLOSE o
$'''''P4'/DELETE '''''t'
$EXIT
$e:WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "e!"
$CLOSE s
$CLOSE o
$EXIT
|
1190.47 | See closet::document | CHESS::KAIKOW | | Sun Oct 07 1990 10:24 | 4 |
| re: 1190.46
If not alreasdy done, it might be useful to enter 1190.46 as a topic in
closet::document.
|
1190.48 | Finally, I can do something to cut costs! | AKOV06::DCARR | HOPEFULLY, you can call me Carr-nac | Mon Oct 08 1990 11:41 | 6 |
| The October Ed Service Catalogue has a form right inside the front cover
that enables you to remove yourself from the distribution list. Don't
forget to take advantage of this opportunity to reduce Digital's costs by
sending the form back, removing yourself from this distribution list.
Dave
|
1190.49 | | CSC32::J_OPPELT | Save time -- see it my way. | Wed Oct 31 1990 15:34 | 19 |
|
Why does every employee need a copy of the Annual Report?
Why does any employee need one proactively sent to him? If
he is in the stock plan or is a stockholder I can see that.
But why send this to every employee?
On top of that, some of it is printed on glossy paper, precluding
me from throwing it in the recycle bin.
****
Why do I still get copies of Competitive Sales Update? I thought
the employee profiles we filled out would stop the flow of unwanted
publications. Many did stop coming to me. But not Competitive
Sales Update. My whole group gets it, and most of us religiously
dump it into the proprietary waste bin (Digital internal use only...)
Joe Oppelt
|
1190.50 | | MARVIN::COCKBURN | nemo me impune lacessit | Wed Oct 31 1990 18:07 | 19 |
| > <<< Note 1190.49 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Save time -- see it my way." >>>
> Why does every employee need a copy of the Annual Report?
They don't. Certainly I've never seen one, and I've been an employee
for 3+ years. In the UK we get the UK annual report, in the US I
guess you get the corporate one. I assume you were referring to the
corporate report in your note. If UK employees get away without receiving
a copy, maybe it sets an example for the rest of the company?
It's the same with any distribution list. The publication should
be sent to the intended readership, and those who receive it should
be able to remove themselves quickly and easily if they don't want further
copies. It saves Digital money and gives trees a break.
How long is it going to be before this simple concept becomes reality?
Craig
|
1190.51 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Wed Oct 31 1990 19:40 | 5 |
| It is a requirement of the SEC that shareholders receive the Annual
Report of a company with the proxy card and proxy statement. So if
Digital is holding any shares for you in any of the many plans, past
and present, you are getting that Annual Report to make an informed
judgment as shareholders. And don't forget to vote your shares.
|
1190.52 | fluff! | SA1794::CHARBONND | but it was a _clean_ miss | Thu Nov 01 1990 07:07 | 4 |
| RE .49 -.51 But I get TWO!! One as an employee,and another as
a shareholder. Now granted, it's pretty, but I think something
a bit more austere might convince serious investors that we
really do mean to cut the waste.
|
1190.53 | | REGENT::POWERS | | Thu Nov 01 1990 09:49 | 12 |
| > RE .49 -.51 But I get TWO!! One as an employee,and another as
> a shareholder.
Are you sure you get one as an employee? I never have. I do get two
now: one as an employee-stockholder from the normal employee purchase plan,
and another because of shares I have in a brokerage IRA account.
We went through this a few years ago when people were getting two
for being in both employee plan stockholders and ESOP stockholders.
Legal (SEC and IRS, for example) requirements can make it hard to
separate such categories.
- tom]
|
1190.54 | Not all US employees get it | VAXRT::WILLIAMS | | Thu Nov 01 1990 09:49 | 8 |
| All employees do NOT get the annual report. I believe only employees
who own digital stock on a magic date get a copy. If you take the
money and run (sell your employee stock plan stock DEC 2 and JUN 2) you
don't get the annual report.
I haven't got one in years.
/s/ Jim Williams
|
1190.55 | | TPWEST::JOVAN | in Her image | Thu Nov 01 1990 12:00 | 9 |
| > If you take the
> money and run (sell your employee stock plan stock DEC 2 and JUN 2) you
> don't get the annual report.
No - I have for 8 years sold ALL my stock on June 1 and DEC 1 and
I still get the bloody thing......
Angeline
|
1190.56 | Competitive Sales Update has done it | ICS::RYAN | | Thu Nov 01 1990 12:42 | 4 |
| The Oct 29 issue of Competitive Sales Update comes with a form that
must return in order to remain on the hardcopy distribution list. Some
Progress!
JR
|
1190.57 | | REGENT::POWERS | | Fri Nov 02 1990 09:16 | 10 |
| > <<< Note 1190.55 by TPWEST::JOVAN "in Her image" >>>
> No - I have for 8 years sold ALL my stock on June 1 and DEC 1 and
> I still get the bloody thing......
Look closely at the address label on the envelope and see if you can decode
any special cues.
Do you get a proxy card with it? That will have a number indicating
how many shares the proxy represents.
Maybe you own some unexercised stock options, or are still enrolled
in some non-mainstream ownership plan?
|
1190.58 | | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Fri Nov 02 1990 12:07 | 1 |
| Like ESOP, maybe, if you never sold those shares?
|
1190.59 | | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Fri Nov 02 1990 18:18 | 12 |
| RE: .49-.51
I own DEC stock and, therefore, DEC is required by law to send me a copy of
the annual report. I receive one copy of the annual report, and that is the
one that shows up in my mail slot at work. I do not get one mailed to me at
home. My interpretation of this situation is that the system that mails out
annual reports to stockholders is smart enough to detect those who are also
employees and to route those through company internal mail, thereby saving
the expense of sending it through U.S. Mail. I commend the company for that
particular cost-cutting move.
--PSW
|
1190.60 | I'm not sure dying would help... | BLUMON::WAYLAY::GORDON | Mr. Whiskers | Wed Nov 07 1990 12:53 | 18 |
| Re: .56
� The Oct 29 issue of Competitive Sales Update comes with a form that
� must return in order to remain on the hardcopy distribution list. Some
� Progress!
� JR
Right, except before that, I got three paper-printed requests to fill
out a profile, each threatening me with discontinuation of my subscription
to Competitive Sales Update if I didn't return it, and since I no longer
work for EIS and wanted my subscription canceled, I didn't return them, yet
I have continued to receive CSU and when I called about the profiles, I was
told that the only way to get off the mailing list was quit. I'm hoping my
current non-renewal will finally stop the flow of paper.
--Doug
|