Conference 7.286::digital

    So, how is this different from the Ford Taurus and the Mercury Sable?
    
    The Universal Platform makes the point that you can order a single item
    (PB226-AB) and get the DECpc AXP 150, software for Windows NT, and
    licenses for both OpenVMS and OSF/1.
    
    Mark

>     So, how is this different from the Ford Taurus and the Mercury Sable?

Because I buy the Taurus from Ford, and the Sable from Mercury.

And the Taurus is a Taurus is a Taurus, regardless of what kind of gas I use,
which wheel covers I get, and whether or not I have golf clubs in the trunk.

No wonder customers are confused.

Bob

    oh, come on.  Don't you know that Ford and Mercury are simply divisions
    of the same company?  Why, of course you do. :-)  I'm kinda proud that
    Digital is using the same kind of marketing tactics as one of the Big
    3.  We need to get the word out there about the Universal Platform. 
    There probably hasn't been a box that runs so many different operating
    systems since the PDP-11.
    
    Mark
    
    PS. "the Taurus is a Taurus is a Taurus" is sorta reminiscent of a
    slogan we used to have around here.  We're mixin' the metaphors pretty
    badly, aren't we?  :-)

    RE: A Taurus is not a Taurus when it's an SHO.  :-).  
    
    Brian

       	Traditionally, the 32-bit CISC architecture has been designated VAX
    and the RISC, and now Alpha technology known as DEC. A VAX7000 and a
    DEC7000 system have different CPUs. Even workstations/small systems with
    the same CPU at least had some hardware differences (i.e. VAXstation
    3100 and MicroVAX 3100)

    	To give one hardware system two different names based on whether it 
    comes with Windows NT (AXP 150) or OpenVMS/OSF (DEC 2000) does seem to add 
    to the confusion factor without adding any noticable benefit (or none
    that I can see). What would you call it if it had multiple system disks
    with different operating systems on each ?

    	Ray

    Alphas will , from now on (until it changes again) be known as
    AlphaStations and AlphaServers.
    
    					Steve

RE: .4

	I miss my SHO. Definately not your run-of-the-mill Taurus.

						mike

    seems to me that if we wanted to promote or "market" {hey that's a new
    word around here, someone call Bob Palmer} truly ***OPEN SYSTEMS***
    then we would promote the fact that either our AXP 150 or DEC 2000 can
    run Windows NT, Open VMS or OSF/1, eh?

RE: .8

Only a hardware vendor would call that "open systems".  Most people
would define "open systems" to be that the *customer* can change
various components without being locked in to a single vendor or
having "enforced linkage" between components of the system...

    No Open Systems means made by MicroSoft :-)

    re:.7
    
    	Maybe it's me. I just don't see how changing the name of the system
    based solely on the operating system that happens to be loaded implies
    that the system is more *OPEN* to anything (other than confusion).
    
    	If anything, it would sound more *OPEN* if it were stated that the
    XXX system can run these three different operating systems. 
    
    	I could see where it could be less confusing to sales and customers
    to see this as one system name. That way they clearly see the benefit
    being offered. Imagine if a customer actually wound up buying two
    systems because they wanted to run Windows NT *AND* one of the other
    operating systems (not simultaneously of course), only to find out later 
    they could have done that with one machine.
    
    	Before anyone gets too excited about the extra sale scenario, imagine 
    that YOU are the customer, and how YOU would feel when you found this out.
    I know I'd feel like I was deceived and it would likely leave a bad
    taste in my mouth regardless of the price/quality of the system.
    
    	If anyone knows what the real reason for this is I'd certainly be
    interested in hearing it.
    
    	Ray

    Are the DECpc AXP 150 and DEC 2000 really the same machine
    hardware/firmware wise (BIOS, motherboard, etc)?
    
    Ken....
    

    re:.12
    
    	Looking at the Feb. 94 version of the VAX Systems and Options
    Catalog, I can't see anything significantly different. They do put a 
    slightly different monitor on them but the size, scan rate and the form 
    factor are the same.
    
    	One is offered with a minimum of 16 MB of memory while the other
    has a 32 MB lower limit. There may be some other differences, but they
    are not readily apparent by looking in the S.O.C.. Expandibility
    appears the same as does the enclosure.
    
    	I'd really like to hear that they are somehow different in a more
    substantial way (i.e. firmware). Even that isn't very significant if 
    it's just an LFU type change.
    
    	Ray

They are identical.  The video controller and other options may differ,
though.  If you put a Q-vision video adaptor and sufficient memory in a
DECpc AXP 150, you can run VMS.  (You do have to make sure you get a 
compatible version of the loadable PAL code, though.)

					Steve

I believe the difference is the target markets. 

The DECpc AXP 150 was/is being sold as a high end PC running Windows NT.

The DEC 2000 was/is being sold as a low end Alpha workstation running VMS 
or OSF/1.

The options the customer would chose would probably be different for the 
two environments but the basic systems are identical. The difference in 
memory requirements is simply what the operating systems require. 

Terry

re: .9

�Only a hardware vendor would call that "open systems".

What's your point?  :-) :-)

Bruce

    Are the Axp150 and 2000 the same?  They'd better be.  I'm told our guys
    have been known to swap labels when we're out of one.
    
    Bill

>The DECpc AXP 150 was/is being sold as a high end PC running Windows NT.
>
>The DEC 2000 was/is being sold as a low end Alpha workstation running VMS 
>or OSF/1.

Actually it was/is being sold as a low end Alpha *server*.  The "bird"
Alphas had much better *workstation* characteristics such as graphics
performance.  The difference between the 2000-300 and 2000-500 was simply
the number of driver bays...

    We were working with a local University, who ended up helping to 
    write some OSF/1 device driver training for us.  They had a couple 
    of "Jensens" (DEC 2000 Model 300, right?), which were installed as 
    NT systems.
    
    In order to convert the system from NT to DEC OSF/1, they not 
    only had to upgrading some firmware, they also need a new KEYBOARD.
    
    Apparently, when you use NT, you get a PC-like keyboard (-AA), 
    but when you use OSF/1, you need a different (-KA) keyboard.  
    The -KA wasn't (at the time?) orderable from DECdirect, but 
    had to be acquired through their local field service rep.
    
    Peggy
    

    I run OSF on my DECpc AXP 150 and I use the "PC" keyboard no problem
    (atleast after you get through all the various installation
    documentation etc).
    
    BTW I also have NT on the disk and boot it every now and again.
    the real pain is that the system clock formats are not
    compatible and you need to do a system configure to reset the
    clock.
    
    		Ed
    

    I really believe Digital tends to overcomplicate matters
    (engineering, sales, HR, et al)...self-inflicted costs overhead
    and mass confusion in the end! 
    
    I have suggested the following "format" in the past; of course it would
    require some bigtime overhaul in AQS etc, but that is one of our
    primary infrastructure problem that needs fixing anyway, right?
    
    Proposed format:
    
    Model DEC 2000-300 (state default configuration here)      $X.00
      Option 100       OSF/1                                   
      Option 101       WNT (this here triggers the proper      $Y.00 
                            keyboard order)
      Option 102       add 64Mb memory                         $Z.00
      Option 103       add 96Mb memory                         $A.00
      Option 104       add n I/O slots                         $B.00
          :
          :
      Option nnn       .....                                    ....
    
    .... you get the drift. The result would be relatively simpler
    quotation, easy to understand designations for all parties. The
    system can be built to catch special dependencies/collisions, for example
    one cannot order additional 96 Mb memory and maximum internal
    IO slots together because one runs out of real estate!