Conference 7.286::digital

    Redundancy. :-)

    Divestiture. 8-(
    
    

    Our product is process.  May be it would be better the other way
    around.
    
    On a more serious note, core business is a term used by a function to
    defend its existence.  This leads to at least as many definitions as
    there are groups.
    
    Martin

    I have been struggling with this also for a couple of weeks.  Does
    anyone, including Mr.'s Palmer and Pesatori, know what business the
    Digital Equipment Corporation is in?
    
    Being a provider of fast, inexpensive boxes may be an okay mission
    statement for the PCBU, but I don't see how it can possibly work for
    the CSD.
    
    Some argue that Digital is a leading vendor of client-server
    technology.  I don't buy that argument, not any more.  Almost all the
    sales support and delivery consultants that understood things like
    ObjectBroker, DCE, RTR, Linkworks, X.400, etc. have either been TFSO'd
    or have left of their own volition.  This is true at least where I am.
    
    Does being the "client-server" leader mean selling Digital 2100 Server
    and PC hardware?  Not much there to differentiate ourselves with,
    except on price alone.
    
    Does "client-server" mean unix?  Hey, OSF/1 is great, but it isn't
    exactly a market leader.  Besides, without the other things mentioned
    above, how do we differentiate ourselves?
    
    The CSD needs a mission statement and a strategy that will enable
    Digital to differentiate itself from every other vendor.  Some people
    call this the "vision thing," but the reality is every company needs a
    "visionary" to guide it.  
    
    Our management has got to get out of downsize mode, and start thinking
    about exactly what kind of business they want to "reinvent" Digital
    into.

    Making boxes, pretty boxes, boxes that mean revenue,
    And they're all made out of silicon, and they all work just the same...
    
    And there's pink ones, and there's green ones, and there's blue
    and even burgundy,
    and they're all made out of silicon, and they all work just the same...
    
    And there's people, clever people, they all went to the University,
    And they all have their MBA, and they all think just the same...
    Etc..
    
    Dave
                                                                    

    "Our product is process".  Process is not a product, but the means to
    obtain a product.  We need a "process" to get a product. We need a
    "vision" to get a process going to get a "product".
    
    Ana

    
    
    
    		   THE ACCLAIMED LEADER in GLOBAL MULTIVENDOR
    		CUSTOMER SERVICES, where THE CREATIVE GENIUS of
    		all our SERVICE PROFESSIONALS is FULLY ENGAGED
    		and directed toward ENHANCING THE SUCCESS of OUR
    		CUSTOMERS AND STAKEHOLDERS.
    
    
    		When you cut the crap out ....it reads
    
    		MAKING A PROFIT!!!
    
    
    

    re .6:
    
    We need [the amount of] process that we have like a fish needs a
    bicycle.
    
    We have confused the ends and the means.
    
    Martin

    Re .8 (re .6)
    
    Well, yes, you make sense, and I agree.
    
    But look at it this other waY:
    
    We developed a process for making disks, which we sold to 
       QUANTUM for $400M
    
    We developed a process for managing relational data, which we
       are rumored to be selling to Oracle for $100M.
    
    We developed a process for making silicon chips, which we have
       identified as a distinct business "for better visibility to
       our customers and partners"  (sounds like AVASTOR, doesn't
       it).
    
    So maybe our core product *is* process!
    
    Dave <ducking>

    I think .4 makes a good point. We need a "visionary" if we're going to
    have kind of a corporate "vision". At least when Ken was at the helm,
    he could be looked to as the corporate "visionary". Granted, at the end
    his vision was not exactly 20/20, but can we say we're in a better
    position today with no vision instead of an incorrect vision?
    
    I personally can't say that we are.
    
    Debbie
    

    i think its kind of sad that .0 can ask what should be a basic question
    understood by all employees of an enterprise and get no answer. at
    least nothing meaningful. that doesn't speak well for our future if WE
    don't know what we're trying to do. imagine how confused customers are!

    Our vision:
    
    We are going to try and survive as a company as long as we can.
    
    We will do whatever it takes, besides telling you exactly what we want
    to be.

Gimme a break, you guys!

We make and sell computers and computer networks and related stuff.

There. That wasn't so hard.

--RS

    regarding -1.....maybe wasn't so hard, probable cause
    you weren't so right either!
    
    p/t
    
    

    
    	OK, Mr. White - What is your vision?
    
    		the Greyhawk
    
    		who BTW will be happy to share his as soon as he finds it

    I'll take your challenge Mr. Greyhawk.........and provide what 'I' 
    would like to see for our vision. But I won't do it overnight.
    This will take many hours/days of thought. The vision should be
    visible throughout the company and divisions/businesses and should
    maintain a consistancy of portrayal.  It MUST be easy to understand!
    It must be rigid enough as to not allow loopholes, but flexible enough
    to adapt to changes in industry.  In short it must be all things
    to all people. (ie: we all dance to the same tune!) It may take me 
    a while, because as you can plainly see from all the comment's I have
    made in this conference, I still have some defiance to a lot of what's
    happening and still feel 'raped' as a twenty year employee that was
    given my twenty year plaque five weeks before my anniversary because I 
    was being TFSO'd and would not be around when the anniversary actually
    hit! And, I'm an ex viet-nam Navy Vet and we generally like to
    complain! ;^)    
    So...I'll take that challenge, and submit a vision to this notesfile.
    
    
    Stay tuned! 
    
    the soon to be NOT Parrot_Trooper!  (Anyone need any parrots?)
    

    .16
    As you build our VISION you may want to consider the following
    topics which are around the word vision but not vision in itself.
    A lot of the "noters" have mixed the word vision with the following:
    
               Digital's  Charter
                          
                          VISION
                          
                          Mission
                          Objective(s)
                          Strategy (ies)
                          Tactic (s)
    
     The Vision may not be "clear" due to those seeking ans to other
     elements. 

re: .16
�    But I won't do it overnight.
�    This will take many hours/days of thought. The vision should be
�    visible throughout the company and divisions/businesses and should
�    maintain a consistancy of portrayal.  It MUST be easy to understand!
�    It must be rigid enough as to not allow loopholes, but flexible enough
�    to adapt to changes in industry.  In short it must be all things
�    to all people. (ie: we all dance to the same tune!) It may take me 
�    a while, because as you can plainly see from all the comment's I have
�    made in this conference, 

This sounds too much like too many of recent visions and strategies.

Bruce

:-)  :-)

Digital's technology focus today is to provide the best client/server
platform for our customers and partners to build on. 

Today, Digital is the leading worldwide supplier of networked computer systems
and a leader in multivendor services.   Our commitment is to continue to be the
market leader in these arenas.

- Taylor

    	So we are keeping our network client/server platform for databases
    (Rdb)? Great news. We got rid of our client/server platform for security
    (DECdas) a couple of years ago. I was using client/server technology
    with a disk block server in 1970 - the client was a PDP-8 and the
    server was an IBM 360/135. This was a multivendor network, with more
    than just the computer suppliers involved.
    
    	Now, 25 years later, what more do we have to offer than disk block
    servers?  Yes, I do know about DCE, but I am not too convinced it is a
    distinguishing factor for DEC at the moment. What do we have new if we 
    are a market leader in that?

re Note 3356.19 by KCBBQ::PRESTON:

> Today, Digital is the leading worldwide supplier of networked computer systems

        Leader in what sense?  Market leader (whatever that means)? 
        Aren't almost all computer systems "networked" these days
        (other than home systems -- and Microsoft is working to
        change that)?

        Bob

    therein lies the total confustion. just exactly WHAT is this company
    defining as "client/server". i talk to a lot of senior people at major
    corporations and they all say they are doing or planning client server
    stuff. and the ALL have DIFFERENT definitions of what "client/server"
    really means when you get to actual products.

    According to ALL our literature the answer to this and any other
    questions you might have can be had by calling your local Digital
    Sales Representative.
    
    Dan 
    Sales Support

    re -1
    
    dan, i believe the more likely response to customers today is to call
    1.800.digital or their local var or reseller. who usually call me.
    
    gene
    
    ex-sales support. again. for the 3rd time in 2 years.

In re: .19:

This message about "best client/server platform" is very confusing. It could
mean many strange things like:

  (a) We're out of the application business and we're just building
      hardware platforms any maybe compilers to go with it. Sure, we're
      porting whatever over to that platform, such as X and NT, etc.

  (b) What if your application is not client/server? Very few applications
      are client/server today. We have been touting it for years and yet
      the vast majority of software sold isn't and probably won't be for
      very long. Client/server computing can probably be compared to
      Virtual memory .. most people use it without even thinking about it.
 
  (c) Name any modern computer that does not allow you to run client/server
      applications. How much "better" is our platform to SPARC or Intel?
      Very hard to quantify. Sure, you can count debit/credit, etc, but
      it will likely only be one out of many factors that will drive a
      customer's decision.

I think we either need to broaden our statement somewhat and or replace
client/server by something more unique to Digital. (positive, that is). 

	Our job is to provide you with the best commercial and technical
	computing environments. We do this by embracing and improving
	industry leading computer systems and solutions. We complement
	these with our own building blocks for enterprise computing. We
	then offer extensive world wide support of these and many other
	non-Digital computer products. Our specialties include:

		* Client/Server computing
			:
			:

re -1.0 
>>       Our job is to provide you with the best commercial and technical
>>        computing environments. We do this by embracing and improving
>>        industry leading computer systems and solutions. We complement
>>        these with our own building blocks for enterprise computing. We
>>        then offer extensive world wide support of these and many other
>>        non-Digital computer products.

   Remove the noise, bla-bla words and what is left.... Nothing

There still seems to be a big group of people that think just because a 
customer has a problem Digital needs to solve it. This clearly a big 
brother 1970's approach. Things have moved on. There is a war on and those 
who survive will be those who focus, focus, focus on a few things that are 
clearly unique. 

Recognize that customers have an infinite number of vendor choices today, 
They are not going to suffer because Digital doesn't offer everything, 
including the kitchen sink.

Our mini-focus on Open Client/Server computing is at least a step in the 
right direction.

The question:  what do we do?  The answer: Open Client/Server Computing. Next
Question: What's that?  Answer?

.22 knows the answer to both these questions:

�    a lot of senior people at major
�    corporations and they all say they are doing or planning client server
�    stuff. and [they] ALL have DIFFERENT definitions of what "client/server"
�    really means when you get to actual products.

I think that we're so used to beating up on ourselves that we can't see the
opportunity.  Many people, writers, analysts, consultants, customers are talking
about "client/server."  Client/server has market momentum.  Whoever at Digital
came up witht he idea of saying "we do open c/s" is trying to do a smart thing, 
i.e. capitalize on the market momentum.  

What a great fit for Digital Equipment Corporation!  We sell client hardware and
software, server hardware and software, network hardware and software *and*
we team with the best providers of other bits: Microsoft, Oracle, Sybase, etc.

That's the program, folks.  We're selling off the pieces that don't meet those
core criteria, so we can focus on what we have left.  At least that's easy to
see.  Our customers, current and prospective, want client/server solutions.  We
are very good, we tell 'em, at teaming with partners who can help us provide
client/server solutions.  

Now go do it!  If you want to work for a software company, apply to one of the 
thousands out there.  If you want to work for a do-everything computer company,
there's only one left: IBM.  Maybe they're taking applications.


Bruce

    
    I had to figure out what Digital's core business was recently.
    
    There is an official bla-bla stategy which changes very fast to confuse
    competitors. An example is Digital Consulting Spring danse. To know what is
    behind, we just can make assumptions, and can likely be wrong.
    Client/Server discussion illustrates well that in fact, we do not know 
    for sure what reality is behind the title.
                                                                       
    Anyway, when one carefully reads official statements, there is more
    information in it than it seems.
    
    Personnaly, I am convinced BP knows more about Digital future than he
    can tell. There is no need for a visionary who would come and save this
    company. Building a strong strategy is something usual in business
    today, and Digital can do it. If it doesn't happens, it is because
    something prevents it. My understanding is that it is Digital's
    management who prevents this company to move with the market.
    
    If a clear definition of our core business was to be published, most of
    managers would react against it if they feel in danger. This is why it
    is so difficult to make a decision in Digital and then to make it 
    effective at BP level. BP experimented this with "Customer first"
    programs, managers did not want to be ranked second...
    
    
    If you put together all changes that happenned during last months, many
    things are worked out (matrix management, indirect channels,...). Just
    remains to guess about the strategy that sustains all this. (and 
    hoping there is one as I think).
    
    
    

    re .28
    
    I wish I could be as sanguine.  I believe, to my regret, that so much
    focus has been placed on fixing the bureaucracy that not enough
    attention has been placed on how to differentiate Digital from the
    pack.  Sure, the organizations needed to be fixed.  But exactly what
    business are we in?
    
    I have not read one thing in this note that describes how Digital is
    any different from any other vendor.  I have read a lot of things about
    client-server that amount to nothing more than sales hype.
    
    So, if I was a customer why would I want to purchase from Digital?  And
    what would I purchase?  (I'm sure someone will say, "client-server"
    something or other :-)).

Atari is hitting the streets with a 64-bit gamebox for your TV.  They are
promoting the 64 bits as a major differentiator and have even worked it
into their corporate description blurb/mission statement.  I guess they're
not worried about consumers not understanding that as an advantage.

- paul

    I believe that what -1 ex experiencing has no answer that will
    satisfy the multitudes.......it's computer hardware and software
    that comprises our core business, then the answer is plain and simple.
    We are NOT anything unique in the industry. We used to be at one
    time, and with ALPHA, we would like to be again.......I mean leading
    edge technology that customers bang doors down to aquire. (remember the
    70's?)  But now a days what we are selling are nothing more than
    comodity based products that are a dime a dozen and everyone makes em.
    
    If you are looking for a 'differentiation' to justify some sort of
    foolish pride that one might have dirrived over the years, it has
    to come from the services AFTER THE SALE.  Hardware and software
    support, and other related services will be the differentiating factor
    that separates Digital from the rest of the pack............Now that we
    are deeply cutting into that support infrastructure, that may go away
    too!
    
    chet

re -1.

Right on! The problem is that we (or to put it right, "out strategy..") seem to
be heading of into the anonymous HW land where the Almighty AXP shall save us.
Soon they'll be giving away the HW when you buy a database or a CASE tool. So
wheres that lead us, then?

/Tom S

    re .31
    
    Well, in the office in which I work most of the people that understood
    our client-server "middleware" (Objectbroker, DCE, RTR, message
    router, etc.) have either been TFSO'd or have left.  This includes both
    sales support and delivery consultants.  So, I don't understand how we
    can even suggest this stuff to a prospective customer.  Client-server
    solutions based on these kinds of technologies don't come out of a
    shrink wrapped package.  If anyone thinks it's that simple, they've got
    a real problem!
    
    I sure hope someone in charge understands these problems!

    re .31
    
    And as far as the "differentiator for foolish pride...." dribble, hey
    any marketing 101 student will tell you that you have got to
    differentiate, or position, your product so that you stand out from the
    competition.  Otherwise, why should someone buy your product as opposed
    to the next?  But I almost forgot, this is Digital and we don't do
    marketing.
    
    :-)

    Support.......to most of the management in the locomotive....ie:
    corporate MCS in the P/P seems to be brake/fix. If you got a
    concensus from them, they probably believe that with the new three year
    warranty, means that the systems are more reliable than ever, and don't
    require the multitudes of service and support folks that we've come
    accustomed to having around. WRONG AGAIN MOOSEBREATH! 
    
    I have not seen an any data from the repair centers, but I'd be willing
    to bet a weeks pay, (not that big of a bet, maybe I'll bet ten years
    of raises instead) that the consumption rate for PC stuff has
    dramatically increased over the past three years, and further, the No
    Problem Found (NPF) rate has quadrupled.......that's profit down the 
    drain folks. And why?  SIMPLE! We are sending non-trained/knowledgeable
    people out to fix PC's.......and the hardware AINT BROKE! Usually 
    software incompatability/configuration parameters/memory management
    problems..........and any 'support' level person worth their salt
    would be able to find it reletively easily. There's the problem. What's
    the solution? It AINT outsourcing brake/fix to a third party as you
    still have to pay for the consumption. 
    
    Someone should ask Rando in California, two things..........
    
    1. Is there a problem with the above and if so.....how we going to overcome 
    this phenomenon?  
    
    2. And if $$$ is such a concern in the current MCS times, then WHY have
    a meeting in the most expensive place you could find?  Wouldn't
    Frostbite falls be more condusive to work?  cheaper to house people,
    probably cheaper to get to, and it would be 'percieved' as a
    NON-BOON-DOGGLE event because it's NOT southern California in
    September!
    
    The support issue is one that I've been complaining about for
    years.....  Won't get solved with the current management structure in
    place either, but that's just my FWIW.
    
    P/T
    

    regarding .34 I double your dribble! and raise you!
    
    There ARE differentiators with Digital equipment, or at least there
    used to be.....and it came from END TO END products and service!
    
    Let's face it, just how can you differentiate a 486/66 MHZ PC with
    same chips as the competetion, same memory, same disks, same printers,
    same monitors, same everything! Simple, if all the 'product' is the
    same then the differentiator MUST come from the services and quality
    of services you offer with all that SAME STUFF!
    
    P/T

    in re .26:

|   Remove the noise, bla-bla words and what is left.... Nothing

    As you can probably imagine, I don't work in marketing.

| There still seems to be a big group of people that think just because a 
| customer has a problem Digital needs to solve it. This clearly a big 
| brother 1970's approach. Things have moved on. There is a war on and those 
| who survive will be those who focus, focus, focus on a few things that are 
| clearly unique. 

    Right .. but client/server computing isn't that unique .. that was
    my original point. Client/Server:ness is only one attribute of modern
    software. You may buy a Database or Mail system than is implemented
    using Client/Server technology. In fact, you would likely assume that
    it employs client/server technology. So why associate an assumption
    with our company?

    For example, saying that we're "The Internet Company" sounds a lot
    better than "The Client/Server Company". We have a lot of the
    infrastructure to support that claim too.

    >Per

    re .36
    
    My comments on differentiating Digital from the rest of the vendors,
    and understanding what business we are in pertain to the CSD, not the
    PCBU.  As I stated in my first reply, .4, being a provider of fast,
    inexpensive boxes may be okay for the PCBU, but is that a mission
    statement/vision for the CSD???
    
    As for being able to offer services to differentiate ourselves, the
    premise of my argument is that we've almost downsized ourselves out of
    being able to do a lot of those services!
    
    I don't know, maybe I'm missing something.

    
    re:-1
    
    	Maybe we are all missing something. We all seemed focus on either
    service or product as the key differentiator between us and our
    competition. Competition being other CPU manufacturers. Maybe, just
    maybe this isn't the marketplace anymore where big margin dollars
    are available. 
    	Therefore we become much smaller employee-wise.
    
    	On the other hand, maybe the market is customized builds (the
    Internet Company concept) for big margin, and commodity assembly
    for dollar volume (low margin, high revenue per employee). Service
    is sold as needed, and so is consulting. This creates a different
    way of looking at ourselves. 
    
    	And just maybe, our SLT realizes this and that is where we are
    headed. It will take a few more months, but just maybe, we will like
    what we see then. I actually think these guys may have it right this
    time.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    
    	...for all you federal government types out there:
    
    	...our core compentency today is "the process" of becoming a 
    	   small, dis-advantaged business...
    
    
    	
    

    <.1> I'm not sure we're even competant at that, when you look at the
    disarray caused by leaks, half-baked redundancy plans etc

         What is so different about our situation?  We are a post-mature, 
    senescent industry and all industries go through a cycle leading to 
    standardization, specialization, commoditization etc.  I think it was 
    John Stuart Mill who first delineated this process a few hundred 
    years ago.  We are now as old as the auto industry was at the end of 
    WW2 and the pace of change is faster now.  What is there to choose 
    between autos today except image?
         
         We can't expect to continue to excel from silicon to corporate 
    strategy.  Even now I find it hard to know whether we are a silicon 
    design company, a foundry, a systems manufacturer, a services pro-
    vider or what.  At least we hardly pretend to be management consult-
    ants any more and I perceive we have always left well alone in 
    solutions.
         
         As to which we should choose, I thought Ed Lucente (good ol' Ed) 
    was right on when he said the most important thing we could do was 
    fill our factories.  Which sector represents the most capital 
    employed?  If it's foundry then let's either fill it or sell it.  
    Then look at the next one.  Identify your true customers, e.g. 
    resellers and not end-users, and don't compete with them.  Don't try 
    to oem alpha-AXP and also compete with your customers in systems. I
    don't see Intel competing with Compaq.  Leave each activity, and its 
    employees, free to get on with their own success.
         
    dave_P

>    I don't see Intel competing with Compaq.
    
    Fwiw, Intel makes & sells "Intel" branded full PC's and also motherboards 
    to OEM's (not just CPU chips).
    
    ...petri
    

    Intel makes ethernet cards, landesk network mgmt sw, chipsets, video
    conferencing systems, departmental servers up to including MP products, 
    and flash memory. They just dropped out of the modem business.
    
    They also have people writing device drivers for live video on pc's
    (DCI - GDI bypass and 3DR (3d api) and desktop mgmt software (DMI).
    They wrote the original windows plug and play code (ICU/CM) and bios
    hooks. 
    
    I could go on and on....
    
    JR
    

    They may _make_ lots of things.  They don't pass themselves off as a
    systems marketing company, with sales and service, do they?

    They don't need to.  They make lots of money.

    Intel sells all of those things, and we, among others, buy
    	lots of it.
    	/john

    
    	Which goes to show you exactly what our business problems are now
    don't it?
    
    		the Greyhawk

    re: a few back
    
    "post mature" - do you mean decomposing ?
    
    Paul