Conference 7.286::digital

Your remarks about the product that is spelled correctly (and trademarked) 
as ALL-IN-1 are truely disturbing.   I may be a little biased here because
I support the product, but I wish to hell internals would of used the 
product as god and engineering inteneded it to be used, as a total Office
Automation platform.  We sure as heck would have realized it's sometime
shortcomings and done something about them.  For your information ALL-IN-1
is responsible for putting bread on your table.  Until recently it was the
#1 revenue generating layered product for Digital.  I am really appalled at
the fact that we sell this product to computing environments and yet we 
don't use it to it's full potential.   We sell the damned technology, we
just don't use it.  I am personally sick of getting VAXmail messages from
high level people in Digital when a better product is out there.  The fact
that you think that people at Digital are just using this to CYA is also
disturbing.  Whatever EM tool companies use, it is the same thing. You
send electronic mail to better run and control their business.  I did a
consulting opportunity for a large pharmeceutical company.  They used 
ALL-IN-1 for everything.  A meeting would not be scheduled unless it was
done so through ALL-IN-1.   But here at Digital we look at it as a burden.
Go figure.

Flame off....

Your not alone in this company.  Many field people are reporting the death 
of ALL-IN-1.  I am here to tell you this is not true.  If you have any
negative feedback about the product, I suggest you take it up with Dave
Holt @REO. He is the product manager.  The engineering group is very 
sincere and receptive to problems or perceptions about ALL-IN-1.  The 
TeamLinks product has given ALL-IN-1 a new life as well with it's use
of client server technolgy.  Give this stuff a chance.  It will make a few
bucks for you and Digital.

Paul

    Well I happened to think that A1 is one of the most sophistaced pieces
    of work ever written at Digital...  so there!
    
    -- cheers,
       Guy (A1 lover)
    

    I hate ALL-IN-1, it gets in my way, and takes too long to send mail.
    
    Laurie$CLI_lover.

��           <<< Note 3569.1 by AIMTEC::MORABITO_P "Hotlanta Rocks" >>>
��                    -< Not CYA...it's using the technology >-


��shortcomings and done something about them.  For your information ALL-IN-1
��is responsible for putting bread on your table.  Until recently it was the
��#1 revenue generating layered product for Digital.  I am really appalled at
    Could you get together with the folks over in 3520.*?  They
    claim I owe the pay for my lazy butt to OpenVMS, and now you
    say it's the ALL-IN-1 layered product!  I'd like to worship
    at the right icon.

    Also, in your above writing, you've used the ALL-IN-1
    trademark as a noun.  If you're going to correct people on
    trademark usage, please make sure your own is correct. 

    Your use of the ALL-IN-1 trademark as a noun, could result in
    the lose of the trademark, the demise of digital, the end of
    the world, and probably a whole lot more bad stuff.

    	Openly

    The ALL-IN-1 product is a layered product.  OpenVMS is not.
    
    ed
    -----------------------------------------
    [I struggled to find a way to use the trademrked word as an adjective 
    :-) in that sentnce.]

re: Note 3569.1 by AIMTEC::MORABITO_P, "I am personally sick of
getting VAXmail messages from high level people in Digital when a
better product is out there."

VAXmail fan here. "Better" is different things to different people.
VAXmail does what I want it to do and it does it very well, IMO. Even
if ALL-IN-1 does more things, I may not need them and I suspect I
don't because I get along very well without ALL-IN-1.

Pete, K.I.S.S. fan since 1976

    Another VAXmail fan...the other product gets in the way...and I hate
    the long distribution lists I get from my manager(s) when they use
    HOG-IN-1...
    
    John

    Another ALL-IN-1 hater here. It's far too slow and cumbersome. I can
    be finished reading my first VAXmail message in the time it takes me
    to even get the first ALL-IN-1 message up on the screen. There are
    too many levels of menus to navigate!
    
    I know it has lots of other features, but I've never explored the even
    *deeper* levels of nested menu options. Yuck! Digital _really_ needs to
    learn a thing or two about user-friendly interfaces. Between ALL-IN-1
    and VTX, we don't have much to offer in the UI arena, IMO.
    
    And don't even get me started on the hour long waits for ALL-IN-1 to
    actually _send_ a message to someone. VAXmail gets it there in the
    blink of an eye, even though I have NMail (a truly AWESOME hack!) set
    as my default transport. :-)
    
    Harry (Who had never even *SEEN* ALL-IN-1 until I transferred to the
    field! We didn't use it in Hudson, MA or in LMO)
    

    re: .1
    
    It sounds like Digital's internal use of the ALL-IN-1 product is mainly
    for e-mail.  Actually, Sales is being pushed to PC's and engineering
    has always used the native mail tool on their desktop.  Why should they
    change?  If you feel that the ALL-IN-1 product would be a benefit to
    those who do not use it, do something about it.  Meet with IM&T and
    explain the benefits of using the product as a tool for the various
    business units.  However, it needs to meet their requirements.  Do you
    know what they are?  I'm sure each business unit is defining a strategy
    to communicate within their organization and more than likely over the
    Internet.
    
    Try walking the walk,
    Steve

I must agree ..... with both sides of the arguement, I always found A1 a 
pain to use, those menu's were too restrictive/embedded & just when 
you got used to where something was, IS or somebody moved it. Now 
I've got hold of the Teamlinks interface for it well, thats another story, 
its great, still got access to most of the stuff I used to use but its got this 
really simply GUI on the front end....

    1) I happen to like VAXmail better mainly because of the speed and
       simplicity.  I don't mind A1 and use it for 'official' notes, etc.
       but I do have all of my A1 mail forwarded to my VAXmail account.
    
    2) It's too bad that internally we don't use A1 for what it was really
       meant to be used for... and integration environment.  I just
       attended a presentation on LinkWorks and it was mentioned that it uses
       much of the same concepts as A1 plus it is object-oriented and
       windows-based.
    
       Assuming that most people are moving to a PC-based interface, I hope
       that LinkWorks is explored and used more internally.  I was *very*
       impressed with the product.
    
    To each their own,
    
    Don

    
    	Hi,
    		surely the problem lies not with ALL-IN-1,but with mail,or
    		the excessive/inappropriate use of it....
    
    	Scenario:
    
    		   I have a serious problem which I believe should be
    		   conveyed to Fred,Joe,Jane,Larry and Tom. Do I ring them
    		   all up and tell them personally ? Not practical,as the
    		   chances are none of them will be in.Do I and go see them ?
    		   Again,not practical for the same reasons.I know,I'll
    		   send them all a mail,and I will mark it "U: A:" .There
    		   now,I feel better already....
    
    	Reality:
                   The chances of Fred,Joe,Jane,Larry and Tom actually
    		   reading that mail themselves,in a sensible time frame are
    		   virtually NIL.Either the mail is mixed in with the two
    		   hundred others they recieved that day,or it is read by a
    		   secretary and dismissed as "Nuisance Mail" .
    
    	The only realistic course of action left is to send a mail,and then
    	call the guy(s) up and tell them to find it and read it !!!
    
    	      (AB)use what you sell ?
    
    					Cheers Mick
    
    					

    HOT BUTTON: E-Mail is a valid communcation tool - no matter which tool
    you choose to use.  It's nice to have the choice ... in any case,
    people need to be responsible for reading their mail, just like they
    need to return phone messages and hard copy mail.
    
    The people that don't read/reply to mail are most likely the same ones
    that never return phone calls.  
    
    Chuck

    Well, let's go a little multi-cultural here.  Digital offers a very
    integrated environment, wherein each of us gets to choose the tools we
    wish to use.  I, personally, only use VMSmail, but that's my
    prerogative.
    
    I have my A1 mail forward to my VMSmail account.  I send to A1 users
    via MTS.  Thus it all works seamlessly for me, and will for A1 users.
    They only need to forward their VMSmail to their A1 account.  This 
    breaks down when:
    
    1 - the A1 user is a bigot, thus his VMSmail account is not valid. 
        This can be because it's forwarded to a no-longer-existant node,
        for instance.
    
    2 - the A1 user is a bigger bigot, and refuses to forward or read his
        VMSmail stating "I'm an All-in-1 user".
    
    3 - the VMSmail user does not have an A1 account.
    
    4 - the VMSmail user is a bigot, and refuses to forward his A1 mail.
    
    I can receive mail from anyone at Digital via either tool.  I suggest
    everyone else making sure they can do the same.  I've spent countless
    hours attempting to find someone (their ELF entry for node and dtn is
    incorrect) or looking up their A1 address because they can only receive
    A1 mail.  It only takes a few minutes to correct all of this, and saves
    the rest of us time, thus Digital saves money.
    
    								Tex
    

    re:14  Exactly right!

I'd like to table the discussion of which mail system is "best" and return to 
the point of .0. Namely, are we substituting internal, visibility generating
activity for the external customer focus we desparately need?

As a field denizen, I observe that customer focus is inversely proportional to
one's distance from direct customer contact. .1 makes my point perfectly.

What say ye?

>As a field denizen, I observe that customer focus is inversely proportional to
>one's distance from direct customer contact. .1 makes my point perfectly.

As someone who works with Paul, you obviously misread .1.  Paul works in direct
contact with customers on a daily basis supporting ALL-IN-1 as well as TeamLinks.

Dave

    Re 17:
    
c>As someone who works with Paul, you obviously misread .1.  Paul works in direct
>contact with customers on a daily basis supporting ALL-IN-1 as well as TeamLinks.
    
    
    Pardon my oversight! Let's amend the theorum: Customer focus is
    indirectly proportional to one's contact time with Digital's turf
    protecting bureaucracies.
    
    As long as we try to lecture customers on how we have THE ANSWER to
    their problems without listening to their true needs, customers will
    turn elsewhere.
    
    The computing paradigm has shifted. We can no longer look at the
    customer through the narrow focus of one or two proprietary software 
    products. Doing so relegates us to a legacy system enclave, ready to be
    replaced by any competitor with a broader view of the customer's
    computing domain.
    
     

    
    	Tex gets three points from the top of the cicle, and .18 slam dunks
    the rebound. All the rest are off the rim.
    
    		the Greyhawk

        RE: .3, .7, .8
        
        Just to correct some misperceptions.  ALL-IN-1 email is now as
        fast as VMSmail.  Long distribution lists are never seen in the
        ALL-IN-1 environment.  If you are experiencing anything different,
        there is a problem with how ALL-IN-1 is implemented within your
        organization.
        
        I'm not going to enter the religious war.  Email is just a small
        piece of ALL-IN-1.
        
        Dave Zaniewski

    re: all the techie B.S.
    
    You've totally misread the base note!  NO ONE was bashing your favorite
    product.  The question pertained to certain people's higly visible use
    of E_Mail facilities (VIA WHATEVER TRANSPORT MEDIUM) as a substitute
    for substantive, customer-oriented action.
    
    Can we get out of the bloody product-religious wars and discuss the
    base note?
    
    \dave

    
    
>        Just to correct some misperceptions.  ALL-IN-1 email is now as
>        fast as VMSmail.  Long distribution lists are never seen in the
>        ALL-IN-1 environment.  If you are experiencing anything different,
>        there is a problem with how ALL-IN-1 is implemented within your
>        organization.
    
    1) it's almost as fast, if you remember to use "express" mode (which
    causes the Sender to send all of its pent-up messages right away).
    
    2) Long distribution lists are seen if you FM a message and then
    import it into another document, something I do frequently. 
    
    Most of all, its the dreaded "Delivery Failure Notification" that
    keeps me e-mailing from the DCL prompt. If you have an invalid
    address, you find out right away rather than the next time you read 
    mail, which might be a day or two later if you travel a lot (I do).
    
    Like the VAX, ALL-IN-1 put bread on all of our tables. I'm grateful for
    that, as I am that we now have AXP, which will continue to put bread on 
    our tables.
    
    However, there's something quaint about logging into a VAX to read
    one's ALL-IN-1 messages - kinda like chopping wood for the furnace,
    milking cows, or going out to the well to pump for water.

re: .18

>    Pardon my oversight! Let's amend the theorum: Customer focus is
>    indirectly proportional to one's contact time with Digital's turf
>        ^^^
>    protecting bureaucracies.
    
This doesn't make sense.  Did you perhaps mean "inversely"?

-Hal

    To get back to .0.  I really like e-mail, whatever version you want to
    use, makes no difference; it's all personal preference anyway.  E-mail
    really helps me get my work done more efficiently, and I don't know
    what I would do without it.
    
    On the other hand, I've noticed over the past few years a kind of
    creeping e-mail "macho" attitude, where the one-upsmanship goes a
    little like this:  "I'm so important that I get 200 mail messages a
    day!"  "That's nothing; I get 300 a day!!"  "Well, I went away for a
    week, and now I've got 1000 messages unread in my mailbox!"  This kind
    of "culture" leads to the situation where people feel like they're
    putting in a full day's work, when they are only sitting at a tube
    reading mail.
    
    In earlier times this was done with paper mail, and the result was
    called bureaucracy.  Now we do it with lightning speed, but it's still
    bureaucracy.

    I prefer VAX mail but I will admit, when I'm part of a distribution
    list it's nice to get it via A1.  One time I remember a note being
    forwarded to me that had been forwarded over two hundred times and I
    ended up having to hit return over two hundred times to get through all
    those damned forwarding headers (I KNOW about the forward/noheader
    option...other obviously didn't)
    
    I use A1 in a different way.  I have a folder for each of my customers
    and I put all information relating to that customer in that folder.  It
    makes the organization easier.
    
    I also, ironically, have a folder called CYA.  A former DECie suggested
    it to me while he was still employed with the company.  In THAT folder
    I file copies of memos of importance so that if at a later date,
    someone complains I didn't do something or communicate something, I
    have proof.
    
    I do understand the base-noter's original point about job
    justification.  Some of used to joke about taping down certain people's
    return keys and when we saw their names on a message in our in-boxes we
    groaned and said something like, "Oh here's  another one from the
    person justifying their existence at DEC."
    
    That is not the fault of A1...
    if they didn't use that, they'd find some other way to look busy.
    
    I think there are advantages to a lot of the tools available to us at
    DEC.  We have a lot more choice than many customers.
    
    It's a matter of preference, kind of like which is better, ULTRIX or
    VMS?
    
    Or which is better?  PC's or MAC's?
    
    You will find people on all sides of the arena on those issues as well
    
    just my .07 cents worth!
    

    
    re: .23
    
    You're right - I meant "inversely", not "indirectly". That's what I get
    for entering a note while having a simultaneous conversation.
    

    I can't believe this group!  .0 was not talking about All-in-1, he was
    talking about what it's used for.  It seems once you people get on your
    high horse about a issue (in this case an issue that has nothing to do
    about anything worth while) you can't get off it.  Stick to the issues
    and forget the B.S.
    
    Flame off

re: Note 3569.27 by NCMAIL::RECUPAROR, ".0 was not talking about
All-in-1"

Let's see where we went wrong: the title is "A1 Madness", the text
heading is "All-In-One Games", and 5 out of 6 sentences mention
ALL-IN-1.

I knew I got that impression somewhere!    

    I will try to make it a little clearer.  The author was not talking
    about all-in-1 the product, but, the way all-in-1 is being used for within
    the company as a tool to CYA.  Hows that, any clearer!!
    

    Let's get this straight. I love All-In-One and over the 12 years that I
    have worked at Digital I have sold over 4 Million Dollars of A1
    to very happy customers...Orange County just one of them.
    
    I hate the way some Digital people are using this tool to justify their
    worth at Digital. Instead of helping to turnaround the company these
    people are hidding behind a maze of A1 memos that are nothing more than
    worthless airtime. They wasting time writing the memos and wasting our
    time reading the memos!
    
    Regards,
    
    All-In-One/Vaxmail/Internet/Horizon lover!

    Of course to get lots of replies to impress people just mark all out
    going messages with delivery and read receipt.  Then i too can come to
    work and say "Look 200 unread messages.." ;-)
    
    Let's face it - A1 or VAXmail we couldn't get the job done without it.
    
    Axel

    Hi there,
    
    
    All this negativism about All-in-1 makes me mad. I use All-in-1 for a
    great number of years and it improves my productivity a lot. 
    
    (It sure beats VAXMAIL because that was made for engineers and not
    for non-technical people like myself. I hate a dollar prompt! I don't
    want to know the name of your VAX. And I do not like :: '"<>::)
     
    When I need te get an answer from a fellow in the US, Australia or
    Singapore to help a customer I have an answer within 24 hours. 
    I press '9' and get ELF, find a name and three letter area code and I
    can reach anybody all over the globe.
    Now look at other companies (like most of our customers) who use paper-mail
    FAX and telex and that sort of 19th century mail systems.
    Many large multi-national companies can not communicate like we can.
    
    And, 
    Yes, we get a lot of junkmail.
    Yes, some people ar real bleeps and use it to stay busy all day.
    Yes, many use it to cover a certain part of their body.
    Yes, it needs a Windows interface
    Yes, it is an excuse not to go to customers.   But.......
    
    Don't blame the system foor poor behaviour of people.
    And please keep things in perspective. 
    IT IS A GREATY WAY TO COMMUNICATE THAT MAKES MANY MANY OTHER COMPANIES LOOK
    VERY OLDFASHIONED. Compared to them we are living in luxury.
    
    Regards,
    
    
    
    Aad Kooijman @UTO 
    (that's how simple it is to instantly reach a person using All-in-1)
    
    
      

And of course for INSTANT delivery within ALL-IN-1, you do 
NOT need to use EXPRESS - you just need to use the latest 
version (V3.1 - released in June/July 1994)!

And as for the future being the Internet....

ALL-IN-1 has for the last 3 or 4 years provided full network 
wide shared file cabinets. You can put a document into a folder, 
and ANYONE else (who you have given access permnission to) can 
access that same document from their ALL-IN-1 system.
This wide-area distributed file cabinet has now been extended 
to the Internet. There is a PROTOTYPE in ALL-IN-1 Engineering 
that provides a link from a MOSAIC or NetScape client on the 
Internet into a standard ALL-IN-1 File Cabinet....

This idea is to allow customers to use what they know (ALL-IN-1), 
but to make their information available to a large number of 
other people.

Cheers, Chris

    When you titled this note A1 Madness bet ya didn't realize it
    would end up meaning Mad A1 Users :-)

    Since this topic is thoroughly ratholed anyway :-
    re: .33
>    (It sure beats VAXMAIL because that was made for engineers and not
>    for non-technical people like myself. I hate a dollar prompt! I don't
>    want to know the name of your VAX. And I do not like :: '"<>::)
    
    	We are in the era of personal computers now. My node name has
    remained the same through 4 different site codes and more than 10 
    years, and in principle I could take it with me if I changed countries 
    and/or subsidiaries. I have no interest where in the world you are 
    located - I just need enough information to distinguish you from any 
    other KOOIJMAN in the world, and that information *could* be the node
    name of your PC. The site IS staff take care of ensuring that ALL-IN-1
    mail gets to my little VAX PC, but if you send me ALL-IN-1 mail you are
    depending on their efficiency (as well as various other things) whereas
    if you send me VAXmail you are only depending on the other things.
    
    	If we were really serious about this business, you-and-your-PC
    would have an identity that you could keep with you for life, and all
    you would have to do when connecting to a network (*any* network,
    *anywhere* in the world) would be to identify you-and-your-PC to that
    network, and then any backlog of mail would arrive, provided it had
    been addressed to you-and-your-PC.
    
    	I don't think node name addressing is any worse than site code or
    any other sort of addressing. They are all bad. The addressing needed
    is either to a particular person (independant of any location or
    network) or to any logical function such as "ALL-IN-1-support".

    well, i couldn't resist replying .36: what about assigning a n-digit
    number to every new-born child which then becomes her/his universal
    id, e.g. his social security #, telephone #, tax liability #, 
    badge #, internet address, ALL-IN-1 address, ... 

    Since this is still a religious discussion, I'll throw in my 2 cents
    worth, and no I'm not wasting work time its 11:45 pm...
    
    re .36, I too cannot resist a reply, at least with A1 mail I can file
    his read receipt and use it to CMA at some later stage.
    
    re .8, if you don't want to navigate n screens to get to your unread
    mail then set your initial screen in your user setup to EM II and up
    pops your inbox as soon as you fire up A1.
    
    I too use A1 to manage an indexing system for my internal and external
    contacts and topics, and I forward all VAXmail and internet mail to my
    A1 mail so that I can maintain a single filing system, so I don't care
    whether some one uses my vaxmail, A1 mail or internet address I only
    have to look in one place to manage all my messaging. And with the fax
    links we now have I can dispatch a fax along with any other type of mail
    address from a single distribution list, top that for versatility,
    efficiency etc.
    
    One last point, I still use my trusty vax because I can't get my hands
    on a alpha and I don't have enough disk on my laptop to run any sort of
    mail product but a VT or a decterm from anywhere back to my vax works
    everytime.

    re .37: Already done in many countries (but not used as phone #... :-)
    
    Of course, these would currently only be guaranteed to be unique within
    that country.
    
    

re:                      <<< Note 3569.30 by ODIXIE::KING >>>
>                         -< Let's get this straight! >-

>    Let's get this straight. I love All-In-One and over the 12 years that I
>    have worked at Digital I have sold over 4 Million Dollars of A1
>    to very happy customers...Orange County just one of them.
    
>    All-In-One/Vaxmail/Internet/Horizon lover!

It's really amazing that in your 12 years of selling this product that you
never bothered to learn to spell it correctly (ALL-IN-1).  8^)   We bitch
when we see it misspelled in the trade rags, but most folks internally mess
it up just as badly.

Regards,

	Al - also with 12+ years in the field supporting ALL-IN-1 and it's
full potential as a premier applications environment. 

    .34> you just need to use the latest 
    .34> version (V3.1 - released in June/July 1994)!
    
    How does one determine which version they are running? I don't see
    anything on screen that would give me a clue. :-( I do know that the
    current version gives me a "That option is not supported" message when
    I try to run spell-check from within All-In-1, using the TPU editor.
    (It works fine in both VAXmail and Notes).
    
    .38> re .36, I too cannot resist a reply, at least with A1 mail I can file
    .38> his read receipt and use it to CMA at some later stage.
    
    A co-worker tells me that it's quite easy to set up your All-In-1
    account to refuse to send read receipts.
    
    .38> re .8, if you don't want to navigate n screens to get to your unread
    .38> mail then set your initial screen in your user setup to EM II and up
    .38> pops your inbox as soon as you fire up A1.                          
    
    Actually, a _customer_ showed me how to do that just recently. :-) I'm
    still no fan of All-In-1 though...
    
    Harry
    

    Well, here in our field office it has become a moot point...  We've
    essentially been ORDERED to use A1 (previously, virtually ALL the
    technical people in DC here used VMS or other mail).  The problem was
    that not all incoming stuff got properly forwarded from A1 to our mail. 
    
    It was stated that it was THE RECIPIENT'S responsibility to know that
    he or she didn't receive a message that didn't get forwarded...  Yep,
    its YOUR fault for not knowing that the mail I sent, that you never
    got, didn't get to you!!!!  Conversations with someone in support
    essentially went "Well, it'll usually forward most things, but not
    everything, and not always.  And it'll USUALLY tell the sender that it
    couldn't forward, but not always..."  So, the few of us that are left
    are now using A1...  BTW:  I had THEM set up the forwarding so I didn't
    mess it up...
    
    I sure miss VMSmail - the ability to list do a dir and just blow away
    dozens of garbage messages by just entering the numbers, and the simple
    "bang the return key" to cycle through everything without all this
    screen painting...  Oh, well, progress...
    
    re .20:
            
>        ALL-IN-1 environment.  If you are experiencing anything different,
>        there is a problem with how ALL-IN-1 is implemented within your
>        organization.
    
    Yep...

    Re .33
    
    >(It sure beats VAXMAIL because that was made for engineers and not
    >for non-technical people like myself. I hate a dollar prompt! I don't
    >want to know the name of your VAX. And I do not like :: '"<>::)
    
    I think the opposite for the same reason (I consider myself a technical
    person).
    
    I use the character cell interface to VAXMAIL because it gives me more
    control, and works faster for me. I have an ALL-IN-1 account, since I
    used to support TEAMDATA called from ALL-IN-1, but I don't have it
    forwarded to VAXMAIL. That is because it serves as an automatic filter
    on my mail. The usefulness of mails received on ALL-IN-1 is a lot lower
    that those I receive on VAXMAIL. I only check ALL-IN-1 once a day
    usually. 
    
    Folders are not unique to ALL-IN-1. I have many set up in VAXMAIL.
    
    Peter

    re: .-2
>    I sure miss VMSmail - the ability to list do a dir and just blow away
>    dozens of garbage messages by just entering the numbers, and the simple
>    "bang the return key" to cycle through everything without all this
>    screen painting...  Oh, well, progress...
    
    In case you aren't familiar with these facilities...
    
    Go into US SWC (User Setup, Set Working Conditions)
    At the top of the screen there is a field labeled 'Main Screen'; enter EMC
    (or for an abbreviated menu, EMCE). Setting this will cause you to go
    directly into Electronic Mail upon invoking ALL-IN-1.
    
    Upon entering EM, do an II. This gives you an indexed listing of what's
    in your Inbox; While this screen is up you can do many operations very
    conveniently. (for example, if you want to make a first pass deleteing 
    all the 'garbage' messages, use the arrow keys to point to them, hit
    Select, and when you are ready, do an XD; to delete messages individually
    enter ## D). The arrow keys (and Prev/Next keys if more than one screen)
    allow you to move around in this index listing easily. Similarly, you
    can pick which messages to Read/Print/etc by the same mechanisms (either 
    one at a time or en-mass).
    
    If you only have a few messages and simply want to '"bang the return key" 
    to cycle through everything without all this screen painting', enter RN.
    
    A couple other tidbits...
    
    While you are reading a message, you can Answer, Forward, Delete etc
    by just entering the A/F/D/... ; you don't have to go back to any menus, 
    they are accepted at the end-of-page prompt.
    
    Similarly, you can move around in a message while reading it via the 
    arrow, Next/Prev, and Gold T/B keys.
    
    BTW, you can also choose what editor and what editing keypad to use for 
    composing your messages on that US SWC menu.
    
    Obviously all this isn't "the same" as the VMSmail interface, but just
    like learning the VMSmail keypad makes using it 'simple', learning how
    to use the facilities that ALL-IN-1 provides makes using _it_ simple.
    
    From a pure user interface viewpoint, I find the two to be about on
    par; however the richer set of messaging capabilitles in ALL-IN-1
    (REPLY/ALL, complex message structures [attached messages and docs],
    etc) lead me to generally prefer it over VMSmail for messaging.
    
    Dave

    Now, try reading a new mail message in All-In-1 while logged in via a
    PC from a customer site. This PC is NOT configured to use the VAX
    function keys. I've often logged in, checked a new message, and found
    that it's really a 40 page "new customer call flow" document, with
    another 10 pages of forwarding headers. How do I get out?
    
    Ctrl-Z results in a "That command connot be used here". EXIT gets the
    same result. The F-10 key isn't properly mapped, so I'm stuck. The only
    way out, that I've found, is Ctrl-Y. An ugly solution to a simple
    problem. :-(
    
    Harry
    

    Continuing on this rat-hole of pent-up emotion on ALL-IN-1 released by
    the base-note in which ALL-IN-1 takes a similar role to the make of car
    used to rob a bank, when having a discussion about whether robbing banks
    is a nice thing to be doing  ... 
    
    re: .45
    
    I've found Kermit to be ideal when accessing ALL-IN-1 from a PC logged
    in from a modem line. See notes conference VMSZOO::KERMIT for kit
    location, etc.
    
    Mike
    
    PS I prefer Coke to Pepsi when quenching my thirst writing CYA memos as
    this creates a sub-rathole.    

If I remember correctly, when our group went to renew VMS accounts a year or
so ago, there was an extra charge of some significance ($35/month?) to have
ALLIN1 on your account.

Since my group was and still is pinching pennies, and that all we used ALLIN1
for was sending EMAIL to each other, the additional cost wasn't justifiable.

Paul

>    PS I prefer Coke to Pepsi when quenching my thirst writing CYA memos as
>    this creates a sub-rathole. 

I couldn't agree more. I think Coke contains more caffine, resulting in a more
agitated state of mind when writing the aforementioned memoes. This results in
deepening and widening the rathole adequately to encompass the whole reply 
stream. 

    As a noter a ways back pointed out, All-In-1 often does some pretty
    strange stuff with distribution lists. For a perfect example, check out
    note 3581.2. :-(
    
    My VAXmail distribution lists stay in my account. (And x-hundreds of
    people don't get accidentally copied on a reply if one of the
    recipients decides to reply and doesn't know that All-In-1 really
    _will_ reply to the entire distribution list if you answer 'N' to the
    "Reply to sender only?" inquiry.) :-(
    
    Harry
    

Oh well, quarterly product rant time. If you think this notes string 
has rodent-orificed so far, you aint seen squat yet...

Isnt this all getting a little confused? Its fairly obvious that the 
"one size fits all" mentality is pervading here. When I do systems 
analysis, I pay a lot of attention to the people that will use my 
system and the roles that they play in interacting with that 
system. Although I have ALL-IN-1 and VMSmail and X.400 mail 
accounts I tend to keep the traffic separate. Why, each have 
different capabilities that suit the different roles that I play. I also 
understand that users have preferences for interaction based on 
what they do. In some of  the engineering community, much of 
the mail  interaction is ad-hoc requests for small snippets of 
information. Communal interaction is more typically by notes 
and the need to document decisions is often captured via a purpose 
built notesfile. In other segments of the organisation, decision 
making is carried out by mail and the plan of record documented 
by mail. The interaction is typically non-communal and the 
action is less peer-like (i.e there is a decider charged with making a 
decision or who has to disseminate according to some 
organisational heirarchy).

And, back to the topic of CYA. Some of the decisions that people 
in positions in the company have do have ramifications. Many of 
the quality processes also focus on traceability. Also, typically, 
the there is no one place to document decisions. The tendency is, 
therefore, to keep track of the progress/process and to distribute 
widely, often upwards. For many, ALL-IN-1 is the ONLY 
communications tool they have, so the result is an attendant 
upsurge in traffic for everyone due to the fan-out effect of mail 
communication as opposed to that for central repositories.  

I've accessed the ALL-IN-1 system via Mosaic and been very 
impressed with the dynamics that this represents. I would 
however, point out that what we are accessing is the distributed 
shared filing capability, not ALL-IN-1 in itself. This is important. 
Distributed shared filing was a capability originally developed by a 
separate project team from the All-in-1 team. The initial 
understanding was that if Digital could solve the question of access 
to distributed information in a controlled way we would have a 
SIGNIFICANT capability in the marketplace. The interesting 
thing was that if you talked to the right user communities they 
would tell you that it was a needed capability.The original plan of 
record was that this capability be multi-platform (with project 
plans written for UNIX and Windows-NT and others) and that it 
be highly portable. I believe the latter was still the case. So, we 
have a distributed technology that no-one else can get near for 
functional capability. Well, the ALL-IN-1 engineering people saw 
this capability. The cabinet server came up a little short on 
management capability so the decision was made to incorporate 
the technology into ALL-IN-1. Once that was done, it never 
came out of it again and plans for other platforms were stopped. 
So, we took a generic functional capability that would have had 
wide applicability and glued it into ALL-IN-1. People like me, 
who dont just do ALL-IN-1 Office consulting scratched our heads 
in amazement. We had been hanging for this capability to start 
talking to records managers, to start tackling imaging sites with 
single, undistributed repositories. In my town VMS is dead for 
follow-on sales. ALL-IN-1 is perceived as big box focused old style 
terminal-based office in this town, because that is what it has run 
on this town. I wont ever change that opinion, despite the reality 
of the ALL-IN-1 capability today and where it is going. I need a 
way of taking my user base to platforms like NT and UNIX 
without them losing capability they take for granted today.

I find it amazing that the Mosaic prototype to the File Cabinet 
Server APIs has been built. Its a good sign. I would like to 
understand however, why projects like Carrell were not allowed to 
carry on and why I cant buy a repository that lives on a UNIX or 
NT box today, or why I still have to use the ALL-IN-1 System 
Management tools to control cabinets for sharing and 
management. This is a marketing decision that is SOLELY related 
to turf and has nothing to do with the needs of the broader office 
using public. A common file/folder metaphor to various 
information sources made a lot of sense.

The ALL-IN-1 group has been extremely protective of its turf. I 
believe in doing so, they are denying Digital fundamental access to 
general, even Open, capability that could be a world beater in 
distributed environments and in the longer term hasten their own 
demise. For instance, why do we have a separate folder mechanism 
for Mailbus-400 on UNIX systems? We could have had a fully 
interoperable repository that would also talk to ALL-IN-1 
cabinets. Imagine the migration message this would represent. 
Imagine the reduction in complexity in clients like Teamlinks and 
in overall engineering effort. Other tools could also use the 
distributed repository AND claim to be open.

ALL-IN-1 has been very good for Digital. Some of its capability 
has also been at the expence of capability in other tools. Ask 
yourself why the store and forward capability of NMail is still an 
ASSET rather than intrinsic to VMSmail? Somewhere back there a 
product manager probably said, "but it will take sales from our 
flagship office product" if that capability goes in. I remember 
when we did a market analysis for generic bulletin board 
capabilities for VTX and the need for mail arose. It was stomped 
for the same reason. Have a look at the sort of un-stovepiped 
information sharing solution Microsoft is coming up with today 
with Microsoft Exchange. Probably architecturally inferior to 
much of the reality of ALL-IN-1 but hey, it gets it all into one 
place and its not just on openVMS.

 If we had had the CFC on Unix and Windows NT we would have 
had a good common repository that our office set could speak 
to.If anything, ALL-IN-1 needs to functionally decompose itself. 

Get the X.400 88 MTA capability into it, and stop calling it 
ALL-IN-1..
 Teamlinks Distributed Filing Server for OSF/1, HPUX, OpenVMS 
and Windows NT.
 Teamlinks X.400 Mail Client. Teamlinks X.400 Mail Server for 
OSF/1, HPUX....
 Teamlinks Information Exchange Server - Mosaic access to CFC, 
Routing, Mailworks 	Folders, VTX and Notes...Oh, and while we 
are at it, could someone add some competitive capabilities into 
Teamroute and get Mailbus 400 onto NT?

FYI: this note has been cross-posted in
HAVETO::COVER_YER_ASS and CC:ed to
him, those, them, dem and the boss with the hem.

I gotta stop drinking that Coke, makes me too aggro.
John

> The ALL-IN-1 group has been extremely protective of its turf. I 
> believe in doing so, they are denying Digital fundamental access to 
> general, even Open, capability that could be a world beater in 
> distributed environments and in the longer term hasten their own 
> demise. ...

I was the manager of the ALL-IN-1 group at the time some of this happened, and I 
have to say that some of your assertions are incorrect. The group perceived all 
of the benefits and possibilities that you've mentioned, and they would, I 
believe even now, go ahead and implement them. The prototype ability to access 
the ALL-IN-1 file cab via the WWW is one piece of evidence of that. There is 
more evidence which is maybe less visible.

The reason it didn't happen at the time is because the group was not allowed to 
pursue these things. Instead, the ALL-IN-1 group was halved in size over a 
period of about 2 years and contributing project teams in other parts of Digital 
were eliminated. At one point the group in the UK had 9 or 10 very experienced 
Unix developers, who are now gone.

None of this was a question of the group protecting its turf. It's more a 
question the company's level of investment in the product set and the role it 
saw for ALL-IN-1 in the business at the time. It was never the case that the 
ALL-IN-1 group that wanted to deny the company access to this stuff. It would 
have been an irrational position to take, actually. No - it was the company's 
decision not to take it up. Opinions vary widely on whether this decision was 
right or wrong, but that's the way it was.

Richard. 

    RE: a few before - getting out of ALL-IN-1...
    There are quite a few different keys that can let you out of a menu, or
    reading a message, while within ALL-IN-1. Some of them require VT200
    support, others do not....
    
    	KeyPad 0
    	F10 (Exit)
    	GOLD Q    (for Quit)
    	GOLD K	  (for Kwit)
    
    The GOLD key is also PF1 - sometimes mapped to NUM LOCK, sometimes to
    F1 - depending on the terminal emulator.
    
    
    
    RE: Keeping the message and distribution list in your account.
    I would MUCH rather use ALL-IN-1, where the message is held ONCE on the
    system, just using one bit of diskspace, rather tan having to hold t in
    EVERYONES VMSmail account.
    
    Cheers, Chris

    This has been the funniest string I've read in a long time :-)
    
    

    And to add fuel to the fire, or widen the rathole (you select the
    metaphor you like...)
    
    In our headlong rush to stare into our own bellybuttons, we've
    forgotten about The Rest Of The World.  Aside from huge corporations
    and huge government agencies, how does the rest of the world (read: the
    Internet) communicate?  SMTP.  No fancy X.400/.500/.xxx.  No
    proprietary protocols. No centralized filing cabinets.  
    
    I'd like to see both VMSmail and All-in-1 mail tossed.  We do not have
    a valid SMTP-based mail system on VMS systems.  And no, I'm not talking
    about the various SMTP encapsulators, like the one in UCX.  I'm talking
    about real, honest-to-goodness, SMTP mail so we can speak to the
    Internet in its own language.
    
    If we had a decent SMTP mailer for VMS, we could have features like:
    
    o reply-to-all-recipients
    o blind carbon copies
    o return receipts
    
    and many of the things that you need big, hulking All-in-1 to do. 
    Please note that if you All-in-1 for its other groupware capabilities,
    it can be very useful.  However, if all you use it for is E-mail,
    you're shooting a sparrow with a cannon.
    
    And it could be done with an ordinary character-cell interface, very
    much like VMSmail.  Since it isn't tied to a central box of any sort,
    EVERYONE can be a peer.  Or it can be dressed up with a screen-oriented
    CC interface, or in a GUI.  
    
    There are several decent SMTP mailer implementations available on Unix
    systems.  Some of these we even ship with OSF/1.
    
    I used to use an SMTP mail system several years ago.  It was
    digital-developed (from an original from outside), and
    digital-supported.  It was also very, very well done for a plain
    character cell mailer.  It had features that VMSmail will never have
    because the MAIL-11 protocol has no idea how to implement them.  Its name?
    
    DECmail-MS.  The mailer that came with DECsystem-10/20 systems.
    
    John
    
    

re .54

So Unix has SMTP implementations?  Well, it should
be no problem to get them running on OpenVMS, should
it?

    So, does anyone care to respond to the basenoter's actual question?
    
    I, for one, am a great fan of e-mail (any kind!), and of confirming
    conversations with documentation and/or sending a document when even a
    detailed voice mail won't do.  It goes beyond CYA, it's a simple matter
    of making sure that all parties are looking at the same thing.
    
    E-mail is one of the best tools we have as Digits, whether you prefer
    ALL-IN-1 or VMSmail or SMTP or...whatever.  It allows us to communicate
    quickly and easily and in greater detail.  It allows us to disburse
    information to more than one person at one time.  It's paperless.  Use
    of E-mail is part of what Digital is all about.  It behooves us to make
    our best use of it and to take other people's use at that same face
    value -- as a tool to distribute information.
    
    And now, for my vote on the unassociated rat-hole, I'll take ALL-IN-1
    over VMSmail any day -- much more flexible, powerful, etc.  I have a
    laptop, but since I don't have a decent (read, modern) printer, it is
    much less useful to me that it might otherwise be.  Therefore, I make
    excellent use of the word processing and list processing functions
    within the product.  I would still prefer something PC/Windows based
    and a modern printer, but, hey, I can dream, can't I?
    
    M.
    

   Electronic mail (like NOTES) makes it very easy to fire off half-baked
   ideas from any source and with wide dispersion.  I think I've seen moe
   than a few half-baked ideas coming from the top in the last few years...
   This is a strength of the tool, but it's not an advantage to the user.

        I'll try a response to .0
        
>    Does it seem to anyone that All-In-One is becoming less of a
>    productivity tool and more of a "CYA" tool?
        
        Less of a productivity tool, no.  I get more done in ALL-IN-1 now
        than ever.  CYA tool, yes, because we've tailored the email
        portion of ALL-IN-1 so that this happens easily.  
        
>    Many Digital people seem to
>    be using A1 to prove that they are hard at work trying to turn Digital
>    around when actually they are doing little or nothing face-to face in 
>    front of our existing and potential customers.
        
        No comment.  An example would be beneficial.
    
>    I know there are exceptions to this but it seems that the more A1 mail
>    that I get from a person, the more that I suspect that they are mearly
>    "going through the motions" to look busy in their jobs.
 
        As a US CSC employee, any mail I get, regardless of source
        (ALL-IN-1, VMSmail, DEC Mailworks, etc) is usually needed for my
        job.  The most notable exception would be the "world-a-grams" sent
        out from generic ALL-IN-1 accounts.
        
>    Is All-In-1 a communications tool or is it an electronic "good ole boy"
>    system that protects certain Digital (players) by making it appear that
>    they are adding value.
    
        NEITHER!  ALL-IN-1 is a tool with large potential.  All tools can
        be used or abused.  The actual result of a using a tool, is only
        an extension of the user.
        
        Email is just a small part of ALL-IN-1.  Visit a customer site and
        see how a tool can really be put to work.  The potential is
        staggering.  Sell ALL-IN-1 for it's new features (of which mail is
        a few paragraphs in over 20 pages of the SPD).
        
        Dave Zaniewski

    Sheesh!  Look.  If you like to wear lacey panties, wear 'em.  If you
    like to wear studded leather ones, wear 'em.  For Chrissakes, kids, as
    long as we can get our jobs done WHO CARES?!?!?  Pick your g****m tool,
    make sure you can use it effectively, then ... do so.
    
    I can't wait for the next topic.  "The Philosophical Implications of
    Right -vs- Left Handed Mouse Usage".  God, I miss Nasser, Goddard, and
    Schutzman at these times...
    
    "I personally prefer a left-handed mouse, as I am a right-handed nose
    picker.  I have attempted to use a right-handed mouse, but the buttons
    start getting stuck for some reason.  Shouldn't everyone be a
    left-handed mouse user for this reason?  Does anyone out there think
    that nose-picking is just another 'cover your mouse' issue?".
    
    Phhhbbbbffft.
    
    								Tex

>   Does anyone out there think that nose-picking is just 
>   another 'cover your mouse' issue?".
    
    Tex, you're getting confused again. Its a cover your mouse _pad_
    issue. Gives your mouse improved roll-through and great cornering
    characteristics.
    
    								

    
    REGARDING THE BASE NOTE!
    
    I have seen examples where too many people are TO: or CC: in a message.
    Sometimes it's a, "look what I'm doing"
    Sometimes it's a FYI
    Sometimes, "this is the current state of play regarding an issue"
    
    So there are two issues, stop the person sending messages to too many
    people and the other how do you solve the problem of knowing what messages
    are important and what are rubbish.
    
    Maybe make stricter use of distribution lists, try to get people to use
    the right ones and be able to add/remove yourself from distribution
    lists.
    Maybe one way would be if ALL-IN-1 included Filtering?
    Or what if when you recieved a message you could say whether or not you 
    wish to get any replies to this message. i.e. you could unsubscibe from
    the conversation?
    
    In my spare time I'm working on Filtering for ALL-IN-1 so any
    ideas/opinions I'd be very interested in, mail me.
    
    Regard,
    Mike 
    
    

>    REGARDING THE BASE NOTE!
    
    Phhhhhbbbbfffftttt!
    
>    In my spare time I'm working on Filtering for ALL-IN-1 so any
>    ideas/opinions I'd be very interested in, mail me.
    
    Apparently, some of us have more spare time than others.  Now,
    regarding the mouse-pad-covering.  I've noticed that, after my mouse
    has been sitting on its pad for more than a few hours, especially after
    coffee in the morning, the pad *is* literally covered!  Does anyone
    know of anyone good industrial solvents for mouse whiz?  (Not to be
    confused with cheese whiz, mind you).
    
    I'm afraid that my mouse pad cover *is* acting more like a filter. 
    However, as opposed to working on a filtration system, I'd like to
    resolve this issue in a manner that leaves my mouse's pad dry.  Do they
    make tiny Depends for mice?  What about a Scotchguard type coating? 
    But would my mouse then have traction trouble?
    
    Please, oh helpful noting community, could someone tell me what to do
    when their mouse's toesies no longer smell like rosies?
    
    								Tex

Tex, mice have no bladder control.  They just dribble.  Seriously.  That's why
they smell that way.

    Gerald, this is *not* good news!  Now, minus the filtration system that
    -.(x) is working on (which I think would probably not work anyway,
    'cause you'd still have the smell), then what are my options here?  Do
    you know what an old mouse smells like?  And don't say "Depends",
    'cause they don't make 'em that small.
    
    Ideally, a slick surface mounted at an angle with a small retaining
    wall and a drain to the floor below would work, but getting a req for
    that (QS-LKA1981-MDB - Mouse Dribble Basin) is almost impossible within
    Digital nowadays, plus I'd have the enmity of the -1 floorers who'd
    probably start sending me Mad A1 Mail (see how this all ties?).
    
    So, what's it look like?  Spork the little bugger?  Feed 'im alum? 
    Wash a full-size box of Depends in hot water several times?
    
    								Tex

    .-1 is an UNAUTHORIZED attempt at rathole redirection.
    
    RED FLAG! Do not pass Go. Definitely NO dinero.

>    .-1 is an UNAUTHORIZED attempt at rathole redirection.
    
    No, Roelof, we're talkin' MICE here.  Hell, you have *any* idea what
    this place would smell like if we was talkin' RATS?!?!!  But you've got
    the gist, if not the rodent, so any direction on redirection of the
    hole in question would be greatly appreciated.
    
    Ya never really know how much you miss nasser 'till ya need him, ya know?
    
    								Tex

    
    	Actually, mices lack of bladder control is really a discipline
    problem (if anybody knows that, you should, Tex). If people would
    properly discipline their mice to use the wastebasket (during
    non-office hours, remember, this IS a business) immediately upon
    bringing them home and deboxing them, this problem would not exist.
    	Normally one associates this type of behavior with individuals
    whose own training has been less than complete, and therefore the
    belief exists that they are projecting their own inadequacies to
    their mice. If that is the case, one may suggest placing said mouse
    (one at a time please - so they cannot compare notes) back into
    their original box for a period of three days minimum. And then
    deboxing them with appropriate training (see Digital Manual and
    Training Specifications EM-6784-FC and EY-4567-00 for complete
    descriptions).
    	If this doesn't work - crush the offender with something very
    heavy (a 20Lb. sledge is perfect!) and order new mice. This, of
    course, will require the approval of your immediate Vice President
    with attendent paperwork and authorizations.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    re: last few
    
    whow!! dat was a wicked way to kill of a note string...I'm scared 
    ah u people...u folks eva taut about runnin' fer dat der congress 
    place? :-)

    Best laugh I've had at work in weeks!  
    
    My mouse has bladder control, thank goodness, but it also has a 
    mind of its own.  It clicks where it wants, won't where it doesn't, and 
    sometimes it just calls in sick for a few hours.
    
    Sigh!

                                                                        
    I have been asked to post this by the Office of Rathole Redirection:
    
    The contention of Mr Eyster that the deployment of mice in
    a notes string is not a form of rathole redirection does
    not hold water (and neither do his mice either apparently).
    
    It is the ruling of this Office that the deployment of mice, rats, 
    hamsters (and their distant rodent cousin kangaroos) all constitute
    a form of rathole redirection (more accurately called rodentdomicile
    rebirthing).
    
    This office therefor calls on said Mr Eyster to cease and desist
    immediately in his efforts to sabotage a Notes string which
    is of such vital importance to both Digital in particular and the 
    nation at large.
    
    

    Sorry, Roelof, but I firmly believe we're onto something here that
    could affect Digital's profitability almost as much as DEC std 131313
    ("Utensil Ordering in Company Cafeterias").
    
    Most memorable movie scene involving this topic (from "The Paper",
    starring Michael Keaton, Marisa Tomei, Robert de Niro).
    
    An unbelievably pregnant Marisa Tomei is sitting at the kitchen table
    when she sneezes, then looks peeved.  Michael Keaton asks "Are you OK?"
    Her reply:
    
       "You don't really appreciate bladder control until it's gone."
    
    Now, back to the original topic...I've lost my original mousebox (an
    event which may or may not be associated with the cardboard confetti
    decorating my office now).  Will any container, same size/shape, do?  I
    do confess, after reading the Greyhawk's note, I *do* feel somewhat
    responsible for this faux-pas, as I have been totally lax on mouse
    training.  My only defense is "My mouse ate my instructions".
    
    Training tips, anyone?
    
    									Tex

    
    	Et al -
    
    		While mice may appear to be delicate objects, this is not
    	really the case. The have battle-hardened exoskeletons designed
    	specifically to handle human abuse; however, they do contain
    	delicate internal electronic organs of indeterminate nature which
    	require extensive manipulative training *immediately* upon
    	activation.
    
    		It is the considered opinion of this author that nearly
    	any cardboard box will suffice as long as the down-time
    	requirements are exceeded. Reprogramming, however, must begin
    	the instant the subject mouse is deboxed, or you will have to
    	begin the cycle all over again.
    
    		BTW, new mice training documentation maybe obtained from
    	our outsourcing documentation provider, Moore Business Systems
    	Division at 45 Scotland Blvd. Bridgewater, MA, between the hours
    	of 9AM to 5 PM EST. Ask for Blanche.
    
    			the Greyhawk

    RE: .74 >Most memorable movie scene involving this topic (from "The Paper",
    starring Michael Keaton, Marisa Tomei, Robert de Niro).
    
    In the interest of shedding further enlightenment on a subject which
    has proven to be of deep concern, Robert Duvall portrayed the editor in 
    "The Paper".  As .66 indicated, with remarkable prescience if less than 
    accurate spelling, >>Definitely NO dinero.  
    
    And while we're on the subject, "The Paper" itself may hold a solution
    to the problem of incontinent mice.  Yesteday's paper, of course.  
    
    RD

    re -.1
    
    Thank you for the credits correction.  Also, does you mouse solution
    thus redefine the meaning of "Yellow Press"?
    
    								Tex :^]

    Beginning next Monday, all electronic mail correspondence between and
    among members of the group shall be include a single letter to classify
    the nature of the correspondence.  This single letter, followed by a
    colon, shall be precede any and all other text in the "Subj" field of
    the mail header.

    It has been determined that the letters "I", "A", and "U" do not
    adequately cover all possible communications.  As such, the list of
    letters has been expanded to 26:

        A:  Action.  Do this, or else.
        B:  Bits.  This message contains detailed technical information.
        C:  Classified material.  This message should be memorized, then
            immediately deleted.
        D:  Delete.  This message should be deleted now, even before reading
            it.
        E:  Edited.  This message has been altered before it was forwarded
            to you.
        F:  Forwarded.  This message has been forwarded to you via at least
            15 other people.  All forwarding headers must be kept intact.
        G:  God.  This message is from Bob Palmer.
        H:  Happy.  This is good news.  Happy, happy, news.  Everybody smile.
        I:  Informational.  This message contains nothing really interesting.
        J:  This message contains a joke.  If you read it, you agree not to
            bring ethnic or sexual harassment charges to the original sender.
        K:  Kill.  This message contains some very strong emotional outbursts.
        L:  Language.  This message contains language unsuitable for children.
        M:  Management.  This message is from upper management.  Don't bother
            wasting your time.
        N:  New.  This is a new message that you haven't yet received 15 times
            before.
        O:  Omen.  This message predicts bad things for the future.
        P:  Print this message.  If the printers are currently down, don't
            do anything else until they come back up.
        Q:  Quiet.  There is too much talking going on in the corridors.
        R:  Reply.  I want and answer from you, and I want it NOW!
        S:  Shutdown.  This message is to inform you that the system is about
            to sh
        T:  Transition.  This message is from the Transition (TFSO) Office,
            and talks about the new transition package for the upcoming
            quarter.
        U:  Urgent.  Read this now, and drop everything.
        V:  Vacation.  This message concerns vacation policy.  The number
            of maximum weeks you may accrue has changed again.
        W:  Warning.  If you don't heed the contents of this message, your
            job may be in jeopardy.
        X:  Excrement.  Flush it.
        Y:  Yawn.  The contents of the message will make you tired.
        Z:  The contents of this message will put you to sleep.

           .78:  a true "keeper."  Instant classic!  Thanks!! :-) :-)

After reading this note string I've begun to believe in Digital (formerly DEC - 
or is it vice versa ?) again:

turning a discussion about e-mail usage into a discussion about medical problems
is just great and takes a lot of creative thinking! Good to see some creative
thinking still alive within the company!

But considering the base note:

it certainly is a problem filtering out the "important" (to me - that is) mails
from the bombardment of "irrelevant" (again: to me - that is) ones. When I began
work at Digital seven years ago I too had the misconception that the number of
new mails in your inbox is directly proportional to your importance in The Com-
pany. However I quickly learned that by reducing your mails (and your
distribution lists) to important ones, my mails tended to be taken more seriously.

Another problem using email is that you tend to fire of mails without adhering to
"The Prussian Complaint Order" that says: "If You have a complaint to make, sleep
over it one night and write it next morning!" .If we at Digital adhered to that
rule, many misunderstood mails would never have been written and a lot of damage
would never have been done...

my $.02, martin (who spent most of his career at DEC supporting ALL-IN-1 at cus-
tomer sites...)

        RE: .62
        
        Have you ever heard of ALL-IN-1 Personal Assistant?  SPD # 37.53. 
        Does all the ALL-IN-1 filtering you ever wanted.
        
        This allows you to do things like, file all mail messages from
        specific person into your wastebasket without reading them.
        
        Merry Christmas!
        
        Dave Zaniewski

    The basenoter's original point was certainly valid and applies to any
    technology used within the business process which encourages or
    supports the ability to appear to be taking action, i.e. "I sent you an
    EMail on that yesterday", while in reality doing nothing. My primary
    customer has developed their techno-cult around Voice Mail instead of
    just EMail. I've noticed some of that starting to grow up around here
    also. So now we can say I Emailed you or I leve you a VME and be self-
    satisfied that WE have taken action and the ball is now in your court.
    Of course this medium itself is a contributor to the Techno-babble
    world that we find ourselves in today. What with EMail (of any ilk), VME,
    Notes and VTX we are all set to take that next step - home office
    everybody and substitute electronic contact for real contact with
    co-workers. Now if we could only get those pesky customers to stop
    demanding face-to-face meetings we'd be all set.
    
    -OFWAMI-
    
    

Re .54:

The MS help file for the -10 is in DENTON::"~amartin/proj/pdp-10/ms/ms.hlp".

VMS Mail is a fly-besotten mound of fecal matter by comparison.
				/AHM

> VMS Mail is a fly-besotten mound of fecal matter by comparison.
    
    Good, good, I'm glad to see everyone's keeping an open mind on all of
    this and working towards resolution without letting product
    partisanship intrude!  Sigh.....
    
    								Tex

>> VMS Mail is a fly-besotten mound of fecal matter by comparison.
>    
>    Good, good, I'm glad to see everyone's keeping an open mind on all of
>    this and working towards resolution without letting product
>    partisanship intrude!  Sigh.....
    
    The VMS developers have long complained that they were not "allowed" to
    provide enhancements to VMS Mail for fear of killing certain unnamed
    cash cows. So I don't think anyone will take offense at the above comment.
    
      John

    	Apart from Nmail which took how many years before anyone would
    authorise it being let loose on customers I believe there were other
    moonlight projects that were never permitted to see the light of day. A
    criticism of VMS mail can only embarrass the product managers of
    "competing" mail products. Nobody concerned with VMS mail has any
    reason for shame, and in fact they managed to sneak in a number of
    enhancements (such as being able to mail executable image files)
    without anyone noticing.
    
    	Of course VMS mail is a low cost high volume product compared with
    any other mail system based on VMS, since it ships with *every* copy of
    VMS, and everyone knows we are getting out of that sort of business.
    
    	If we were seriously into the electronic mail market we would have
    had a single product that ran on all major (i.e. including non-DEC)
    platforms. Corporate decisions have shown that we are not seriously in
    the electronic mail market by :-
    1) forbidding enhancements to our widest used mail product (VMS mail)
    2) starving other mail products of development and marketing funds
    thereby ensuring they can't get into major volume markets (see .3)
    3) showing no interest in moving *any* mail system to other platforms
    until it was rather late (yes, I know you can use All-In-1 mail from an
    MS-DOS PC).
    
    	Given the above management imposed limitations the software
    engineers of all our mail products have performed a miracle in getting
    any customer to use any of our mail software on our hardware.
    
    	I only use VMS mail, but some of my best friends use our
    other products ;-)

Re .85:

>              -< Thank God these notesfiles are internal only... >-

Some few in this conference will recognize the line in .84 as a quote from a
*customer* regarding a different Digital product.
				/AHM