T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
2555.1 | :-) | REGENT::LASKO | CPBU Desktop Hardcopy Systems | Thu Jun 24 1993 13:49 | 7 |
| Why not both, since many assert that they are different ways of working.
"The DEC and digital ways of working"? :-)
By the way, isn't it time for another car plan gripe or does that come
after the gripes about people who don't return telephone calls? I've
lost track.
|
2555.2 | A | WMOIS::STYVES_A | | Sun Jun 27 1993 21:28 | 3 |
| To us purists it will always be "DEC" and we don't really care what
the outsiders call it. �3�b
|
2555.3 | "Digital not DEC" | SUBSYS::HOUGHTON | | Mon Jun 28 1993 14:50 | 9 |
| the following quote is from the inside of my last paystub:
"Digital is strengthening its worldwide brand identity
and image. We ask all employees to help in all their
internal and external communications -- our name is
Digital, not DEC."
I agree with this."DEC" may be historic, but I think things
are quite different these days.
|
2555.4 | Consistancy.....very lacking | GENRAL::KILGORE | Cherokee and Proud of It! | Mon Jun 28 1993 15:06 | 19 |
| I wish the various groups would be consistant in what the policy is.....
In DEC STD 197-0, Legal Requirements and Guidelines for Digital Publications
and Software, which was just released last Friday, June 25th, it states:
"The following copyright notice must be included in all publications
written by Digital...."
� Digital Equipment Corporation 19XX. All rights reserved.
But "where the size or graphical style of a publication does not
allow the full copyright notice, the following abbreviated forms
are allowable."
� Digital Equipment Corp. 1993.
"or, if necessary,"
� DEC 1993
|
2555.5 | | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, ISV Tech. Support | Mon Jun 28 1993 15:55 | 11 |
| so who reads (or quotes) copyright statements? The rules that are
appropriate to copyright laws may conflict with good marketing. :-)
I think the branding is a good idea, I hope that it will help connect
us with new customers. For all of us (and our regular customers), the
emphasis may seem silly. Our first impression to our new customer
should be the most positive one that is possible. "Digital" vs. "DEC"
confusion is not necessary, so just say "Digital". It also sounds
nicer than "DEC" when spoken.
Mark
|
2555.6 | | MU::PORTER | life is a cabernet, old chum.. | Mon Jun 28 1993 22:34 | 7 |
| >It also sounds
>nicer than "DEC" when spoken.
I strongly disagree. It makes one sound like one can't
tell the difference between an adjective and a noun. This
is the crux of my complaint; it doesn't scan well.
|
2555.7 | | PLAYER::BROWNL | The match has gone out | Tue Jun 29 1993 08:44 | 5 |
| I too think branding is a good idea. I just think they chose the wrong
name. Like Mr. Porter, I disagree that "Digital" sounds better than
"DEC".
Laurie.
|
2555.8 | We know best | COUNT0::WELSH | Yippee! I got the package!! | Tue Jun 29 1993 10:15 | 14 |
| We've been over this ground before.
Research shows that the public will generally use the shortest
pronounceable form of a company name. Therefore people will use
DEC. If we insist they use Digital we will be in the position of
a company that argues with the customer about its own name before
it even starts asking what it can sell him. Not too smart.
Common sense, really. If only Digital bosses could break themselves
of the habit of deciding what's right and then telling everyone
else. Even when what's right is breaking themselves of the habit
of deciding what's right and then telling everyone else.
/Tom
|
2555.9 | Common Sense? | DYPSS1::COGHILL | Steve Coghill, Luke 14:28 | Tue Jun 29 1993 10:40 | 9 |
| Re: Note 2555.8 by COUNT0::WELSH "Yippee! I got the package!!"
� Common sense, really. If only Digital bosses could break themselves
Common sense is not so common.
--Voltaire (Dictionnaire Philosophique [1764], Self-Love)
|
2555.10 | Dunno 'bout you, but I work for DEC! | TALLIS::PARADIS | There's a feature in my soup! | Tue Jun 29 1993 14:17 | 21 |
| I just received a package this morning (from an outside vendor)
addressed to:
Jim Paradis
DEC
50 Nagog Park
Acton MA 01720
AKO2-1/G3
Seeing as the package was addressed to "DEC" and not "Digital", I
suppose the mailroom should've refused it and sent it back right?
Pfui.
Me... I'll continue to call it DEC until someone fires me for it.
[maybe I oughta get some buttons and T-shirts made that say, "I still
work for DEC"]
--jim
|
2555.11 | why put it to the test? | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, ISV Tech. Support | Tue Jun 29 1993 15:05 | 4 |
| so why all the insubordinate behavior? Your boss has directed you to
use the proper name of the company. Nowhere have I seen any attempt to
control the behavior of customers. They can call us whatever they
want!
|
2555.12 | DEC got my tongue? | RCOCER::MICKOL | No Sir, I don't like it! | Wed Jun 30 1993 00:07 | 11 |
| I don't know about you, but I have a hard time saying Digital. I've had to
make a bunch of calls to customers today and have said "This is Jim Mickol
from Digital" and although I've never been known to have a speech impediment,
I find myself almost slurring the word Digital. Maybe a freudian thing...
And I've been calling us Digital since before Bob Palmer worked for Digital.
Regards,
Jim
|
2555.13 | | SUBWAY::CATANIA | | Wed Jun 30 1993 01:07 | 3 |
| .11
I think we should be happy that they still call us at all. 8-)
|
2555.14 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Wed Jun 30 1993 04:55 | 6 |
|
yup, I have a similar problem........but at least it's better
than saying Digital Equipment
Heather
|
2555.15 | This is going to be tougher than I thought | COUNT0::WELSH | Yippee! I got the package!! | Wed Jun 30 1993 06:32 | 23 |
| re .11:
> so why all the insubordinate behavior? Your boss has directed you to
> use the proper name of the company. Nowhere have I seen any attempt to
> control the behavior of customers. They can call us whatever they
> want!
This reply was probably a joke, but on the off chance you were
serious...
Presumably this means you see nothing wrong with a situation
where everyone in the company calls it Digital and everyone
outside it calls it DEC?
To put it mildly, this would run counter to principles of
effective communication. Like, people would not have the
faintest idea what other people were talking about.
/Tom
ps I have used the name "Digital" ever since we were first
officially told to do so - which is more than can be said
for many employees, VPs and PR included.
|
2555.16 | Similar thinking | COUNT0::WELSH | Yippee! I got the package!! | Wed Jun 30 1993 06:59 | 10 |
| re .15:
Reminds me of the joke about the time the Irish government
decided to change to driving on the right hand side of the
road. But to avoid excessive disruption, they decided to do
it in two stages: from Monday, all cars to drive on the right;
starting Tuesday, all buses, vans and lorries.
/Tom
|
2555.17 | Digital World show | MEMIT::SILVERBERG_M | Mark Silverberg MLO1-5/B98 | Wed Jun 30 1993 08:02 | 7 |
| Wonder if anyone will confuse the just completed "Digital World"
trade show with our own "DECworld" show? Have we lost the right
to "DigitalWorld"? ps Digital World show was not a Digital
Equipment Corp. show.
Mark
|
2555.18 | A correction would have just confused him | AKOCOA::BBARRY | Sand: The enemy of kilted yaksmen | Wed Jun 30 1993 10:50 | 13 |
| I recently purchased a new vehicle, and the sales rep asked where I
worked; I said "Digital." He answered, "Oh, you work at DEC, what
site?" He also asked if I would be using the DEC Credit Union, or
would I want him to finance the purchase.
The point is, that the people who knew/know us as DEC will continue
to use that name, while the newcomers will only hear Digital, and will
use that name. Its like when you change your last name, as in marriage,
divorce, ethnics, etc., Even though you're the same person, you are
known by one name to those who just met you, and a different name to
those who knew you before you changed your name.
/Bob
|
2555.19 | How deep is a rat-hole? | AMCUCS::YOUNG | I'd like to be...under the sea... | Wed Jun 30 1993 14:24 | 8 |
| So let them continue to use DEC. Let them call us whatever they like,
just don't introduce yourself as from DEC; that's all that the wigs are
saying. Use the word 'Digital' to refer to the company. What's the
big deal? At least they aren't calling us 'S__t-heads', ...much.
8-<;^)
cw
|
2555.20 | Revisionist Historians have been at work. | A1VAX::GUNN | I couldn't possibly comment | Wed Jun 30 1993 14:44 | 22 |
| I still have in my collection of "interesting stuff" picked up during
my various jobs at Digital/DEC one of the original systems modules
from the late fifties. These were circuit functions assembled from
discrete components and enclosed in an aluminium case.
On the back of this module is stamped:
DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
MAYNARD, MASSACHUSETTS
while on both sides of the case is a logo:
d
e
c
- "clear" letters on a dark brown rectangle, except for the top of the
vertical stroke of the d which extends outside the rectangle and is
itself dark brown. By "clear" I mean the case colour shows through.
Beside this logo is an R in a circle indicating a registered trademark
in those days.
|
2555.21 | | CTHQ::SANDSTROM | born of the stars | Wed Jun 30 1993 16:51 | 9 |
| So what's going to happen with all of the "DEC" products that are
out there today, will they become "Digital" products?
Does DECwrite become Digitalwrite DIGITALwrite DigitalWrite....
DECnet....
DECpresent....etc.
Conni
|
2555.22 | | TOPDOC::AHERN | Dennis the Menace | Wed Jun 30 1993 17:18 | 13 |
| RE: .21 by CTHQ::SANDSTROM
>So what's going to happen with all of the "DEC" products that are
>out there today, will they become "Digital" products?
>Does DECwrite become Digitalwrite DIGITALwrite DigitalWrite....
> DECnet....
> DECpresent....etc.
Not to worry, Conni, they will probably all be sold off to third
parties who are in the software business who will then call them
whatever they like.
|
2555.23 | more DEC stuff | DECLNE::TOWLE | | Wed Jun 30 1993 18:29 | 6 |
| And what about all the new ALPHA products....
DEC 3000 model 400
DEC 3000 model 500
DEC 3000 etc, etc.......
|
2555.24 | what do people think "digital" is | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | You are what you retrieve | Wed Jun 30 1993 21:22 | 17 |
| In this new branding campaign there is a strong suggestion that a new
naming scheme is being worked out for many of the DEC prefix products.
I join with the other comments that it is unlikely that if the company
remains "Digital Equipment Corporation" the name that most customers
will continue to recall will be "DEC".
The great problem with being thought of as "Digital" is that where
"digital" has any recognition it is in the concept of display (ie
watches, clocks, etc.) and transmission (CD's, HDTV, etc.) and not
in computing. Even if computing really is digital, the word doesn't
have impact.
The analogy I recall are International Harvester trying to sell
passenger cars. Could you imagine the maxufacturers of Johnson's Wax
making their shaving gel "Johnson's Wax Shaving Gel"? No, it's called
Edge.
|
2555.25 | Ever heard of DEC? | SNOC02::GREBLEJ | I heard it on the NOTESvine! | Wed Jun 30 1993 22:31 | 9 |
| I just met a person who was showing me around Perth. She said, "So you
work for Digital, My husband uses computers from a company called
D,E,C. Have you ever heard of them?" I explained they are one in the
same and she said, "Oh do you know any of the people in Irvine?". I
said "California?". Here she thought D.E.C. was just a small company
consisting of the people she had met in Irvine. Anyway, is seemed
amusing to me since there has been all the talk about this lately.
John
|
2555.26 | Prego is good | POWDML::MACINTYRE | | Thu Jul 01 1993 09:03 | 20 |
| Relating to "branding".
Years ago, the Campbell Soup Co. decided to get into the spaghetti
sauce market and tested a product in several cities. The product was a
complete failure and it was pulled back for a makeover. The formula
was not changed, just the name.
You see lots of folks were put off by the idea of buying "Campbell's
Spaghetti Sauce" even though they liked the product in blind testing.
Campbell's changed the name and today "Prego Spaghetti Sauce" is a
leading brand and contributor to the company's continued success.
For us to call our products a "Digital whatever Model XXX" would put us
into the generic world in many minds. Keeping DEC and building on it
would have made a lot more sense.
Just MHO,
Marv
|
2555.27 | CSS????? | DECLNE::TOWLE | | Thu Jul 01 1993 10:35 | 7 |
|
Another example would be a group in Digital called Digital Support
Services, or Enterprised Integration services, or....CSS!! If I
use any of the full-names-titles, there is a puzzled look on the
persons face, but use the term 'CSS' and "DAWN-OVER-MARBLE-HEAD"!!
-VT
|
2555.28 | | BJ6000::DAVE | Outlanders, Do it Again | Thu Jul 01 1993 11:55 | 17 |
| Folks,
You're all using some sort of electronic input device to take part in
this discussion. On the front of the video tube is a corporate logo.
I've only seen Digital printed there. The storage expansion I have has
the same logo as does my CPU. Every company office I've ever been to has
had the same Digital sign out front. My business cards have Digital on
them. Even my paycheck has the Digital logo on it.
The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
whereever possible. Any branding confusion has been caused by our people
using an acronym that the company, including the founder, never wanted.
Lets stop whining and get on with life.
Dave Brunell
|
2555.29 | Whaaahhh Whaah Whaaahh...sniff | SALEM::DACUNHA | | Thu Jul 01 1993 12:43 | 19 |
|
Someone a few replies back mentioned research which has shown
"People will use the shortest pronounceable name" or some such.
I believe I read in DIGITAL Today that our marketing research
has shown the name DIGITAL is more widely used/accepted in the
market. That's why the decision to emphasize this identity
and de-emphasize others was handed down. So......
What's the big deal? It really can't be that hard to modify
such a habit. At least for employees. It's simply NOT your
decision to make. Get with the program!! Holy smoke...
such a fuss about something so simple. I can see how some folks
have "contributed" to the current situation DIGITAL is in.
Spend all your time whining about something so...so...silly!!
Maybe if we had such enthusiasm about delivering quality
solutions on time.....Just imagine! ;')
|
2555.30 | | POWDML::MACINTYRE | | Thu Jul 01 1993 14:01 | 23 |
| re last .28 & .29
Very few people have said anything about *not* adhering to the
corporate directive concerning Digital -vs- DEC, so you can take a
break from the superior attitude.
By and large, the discussion has centered around whether the decision
was the best one to make. There is nothing wrong with that. In fact,
if you were intellectually honest, you'd also be asking questions. For
those of us who truely want Digital Equipment Corporation to regain its
place as a profitible, vibrant company asking questions and offering
recommendations is a duty. For those who are more attuned to toeing
the line and marching in lock-step we represent a threat.
Those that are willing to unquestioningly follow orders are welcome to
do so. When things come crashing down you can proudly declare, "Don't
look at me. I followed my orders." while the rest of us can declare
with equal conviction, "We tried but no one listened."
Regards,
Marv
|
2555.31 | | BJ6000::DAVE | Outlanders, Do it Again | Thu Jul 01 1993 15:08 | 20 |
| re .30
If you we're so busy being so self riteous you wouldn't have missed the
point. There is NOTHING new about Digital Equipment Corporation wanting
to be known as Digital. This is NOT a new decision. There has just been
a realization that the rank and file has done much to cloud the name
recognition that the company has been trying for since it was founded in
1957! Other than the color and the little circles, our company logo has
been unchanged for over 30 years! There is nothing about being
"intellectually honest" involved here. Digital in the past has been
willing to sit back and allow everyone to use and abuse its name. The
fact that someone has finally woken up to the problem this has caused us
is great news!
This company has ALWAYS wanted to be called Digital. Sometimes, like
on a stock ticker or the back of a board it doesn't fit. Sometimes for
ease of copyright it gets shortened when tacked on the front of a name.
When you talk about the corporate entity, it has ALWAYS wanted to be
called Digital Equipment Corporation, or Digital. There has been no
change ever in this policy.
|
2555.32 | | POWDML::MACINTYRE | | Thu Jul 01 1993 15:25 | 16 |
| re .31
If you weren't so busy being uptight you wouldn't have missed the point
of my entry. This is not an issue of what's new or old. It's not
about what the company wants or has always wanted. The point is
whether or not it is a good idea deciding to go exclusively to Digital
and banish DEC.
The discussion still is centered on whether you make bold moves and
aggressively push "branding" or whether you pussyfoot around, tinkering
here and there by changing a dot or a color in the hope that "branding"
will happen.
Marv
|
2555.33 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | can't roll a 7 w/loaded dice | Thu Jul 01 1993 16:17 | 9 |
|
RE: .29 & .31 You just don't get it. Customers used to enjoy dealing
with DEC, it wasn't easy, but the gear was real good and we tried hard
and we were real people.
Mike
|
2555.34 | not trademarkable so hardly a brand | CARAFE::GOLDSTEIN | Global Village Idiot | Thu Jul 01 1993 17:25 | 16 |
| I'm still rather concerned about attempts to "brand" something that
can't be trademarked. Prego was shown to be a valuable trademark, just
as Campbell's is valuable in the canned soup business. But the name
"Digital" is not a trademark and cannot be; only the printed form logo
can.
I don't make phone calls on American, but I do use AT&T.
I don't wash my clothes in a General, but I do use GE.
I don't drive to work in a General, but I do drive a GM Chevy.
I received mail this week from someone at Digital Products Corp., "the
leader in printer sharing". I guess if I want a multi-user printer,
I'll go to Digital, right?
Maybe we do need a better brand than DEC, but "Digital" isn't uniquely
ours.
|
2555.35 | go figure... | CSOADM::ROTH | Light fuse and retire quickly | Thu Jul 01 1993 18:43 | 2 |
| And, of course, Campbell's now sells canned spaghetti sauce under the
"Campbell's" label...
|
2555.36 | digression :-) | REGENT::LASKO | CPBU Desktop Hardcopy Systems | Thu Jul 01 1993 18:52 | 7 |
| > I received mail this week from someone at Digital Products Corp., "the
> leader in printer sharing". I guess if I want a multi-user printer,
> I'll go to Digital, right?
Sure hope so. We make some great ones.
[I've always identified myself as working for `Digital Equipment'.]
|
2555.37 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | You are what you retrieve | Thu Jul 01 1993 23:49 | 4 |
| Digital Products, some years ago, was a scam company, "operated" by
Robert Brennan of First Jersey Securities "Come Grow With Us".
Brennan is banned for life from the securities industry.
|
2555.38 | | CUPMK::AHERN | Dennis the Menace | Fri Jul 02 1993 00:35 | 6 |
| RE: .28 by BJ6000::DAVE
>The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
Digital is an acronym? What does it stand for?
|
2555.39 | | SPECXN::WITHERS | Bob Withers | Fri Jul 02 1993 01:56 | 13 |
| Damn, it grabbed its tail and left ???????????????????
>================================================================================
>Note 2555.38 I work for "digital" 38 of 38
>CUPMK::AHERN "Dennis the Menace" 6 lines 1-JUL-1993 23:35
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> RE: .28 by BJ6000::DAVE
>
> >The company for years now has been trying to use Digital as the acronym
>
> Digital is an acronym? What does it stand for?
>
|
2555.40 | | PLAYER::BROWNL | The match has gone out | Fri Jul 02 1993 08:00 | 5 |
| RE: <<< Note 2555.30 by POWDML::MACINTYRE >>>
Well said that man, every word. Well said!
Laurie.
|
2555.41 | | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Fri Jul 02 1993 14:02 | 9 |
| I seem to recall that [one of] the problem[s] with "DEC" is that it
*is* an acronym. People in this conference write IBM and AT&T and
NEC and HP and GM and GE and think that DEC is the same. But they're
eye-bee-em, aie-tea-and-tea, en-ee-see, aich-pea, gee-em, and gee-ee,
but ours is dek. If it were dee-ee-see, it would not be a problem.
Why it is a problem is one of those obscure legal things that no appeal
to common sense will ever change.
Ann B.
|
2555.42 | | BSS::CODE3::BANKS | Not in SYNC -> SUNK | Mon Jul 12 1993 16:33 | 16 |
| Re: <<< Note 2555.0 by SPEZKO::A_FRASER "Mobius Loop; see other side" >>>
> So, should the title of this conference be changed to;
>
> "The digital way of working"
It's funny but I'd always thought that was the name of this conference, though
notes I've saved going back several years all show "The DEC way of working" as
the title.
But then I found that EASYNOTES.LIS lists it as "Digital Style of Working" and
now doing a Notes> SHOW CONF now shows it as "The Digital way of working".
So obviously the title has now been changed (back? :-) as suggested...
- David
|
2555.43 | Sharp eyes but a little slow | FUNYET::ANDERSON | OpenVMS Forever! | Tue Jul 13 1993 16:26 | 5 |
| Ah, so someone noticed! I changed the conference name from "The DEC way of
working" to "The Digital way of working" about two weeks ago. I don't know how
EASYNOTES.LIS has always listed the conference.
Paul
|
2555.44 | | BSS::CODE3::BANKS | Not in SYNC -> SUNK | Tue Jul 13 1993 16:54 | 13 |
| Re: <<< Note 2555.43 by FUNYET::ANDERSON "OpenVMS Forever!" >>>
> -< Sharp eyes but a little slow >-
>Ah, so someone noticed! I changed the conference name from "The DEC way of
>working" to "The Digital way of working" about two weeks ago.
Well I only noticed after coming back from vacation where I was completely out
of touch with notes (ARRGH!)
I don't know what everyone else's excuse is... :-) :-)
- David
|
2555.45 | | CVG::THOMPSON | Radical Centralist | Tue Jul 13 1993 17:46 | 8 |
| > I don't know how
>EASYNOTES.LIS has always listed the conference.
According to my records, it's was listed as "The Digital style of
working" at least as far back as Feb 1986. At least as far as EASYNOTES.LIS
is concerned.
Alfred
|