| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 3952.1 | try here (also?) | KLUSTR::GARDNER | The secret word is Mudshark. | Wed Jun 21 1995 09:44 | 4 |
| this is probably best asked in KENT::TURBOLASER, but I'm sure
that the inevitable HP FUD rathole could grow here...
_kelley
|
| 3952.2 | Typical HP FUD | MRKTNG::BURROUGHS | | Wed Jun 21 1995 10:09 | 17 |
| This is typical HP FUD on R/3. The 36,000 transactions refers to our
benchmark on R/3 SD module. A complex, cycle consuming application. We
also maintained a response time of 1.45 secs.per transaction which
translates into 1000 SD users.
The customer should ask what the transactions represent: SD, FI or MFG.
And the response time that HP attained.
HP is concerned with the power of alpha and is distorting performance
numbers to their advantage. Sun is also doing this. The question goes
back to how representative the benchmarks are in predicting how the
application will perform for the customer with the customers own data.
Contact me direct and I will plug you into our SAP Expertice center
here in ZKO.
Al
|
| 3952.3 | T500 not so hot! | MIMS::SANDERS_J | | Wed Jun 21 1995 16:59 | 11 |
| I am working with an HP account that was in the process of replacing
their mainframe applications with SAP/R3 on an HP9000-T500. They have
stopped adding any additional SAP/R3 modules to the system because of
the poor performance of the T500 and have brought Digital into the
account so they can have a look at Alpha. This account was feautured
in "Client Server Computing" magazine as a great HP win. Of course the
article was written before the implementation began.
If we replace the HP, and the account gives its permission, you will
hear about it right here. It would make a wonderful story.
|
| 3952.4 | | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Wed Jun 21 1995 18:34 | 10 |
| Our performance folks in the SPG need a chance to crawl into the belly
of this thing and find out why it stinks so bad, I've seen the press
release and on the surface it looks up front but it can't possibly be.
We've had some success in casually steering SAP sales reps into taking
customers on reference site visits to places where they are unhappy
with HP's performance and support but it's a tricky game, the customer
has to be a happy and willing reference for the software but soft on
HP. I think the customer in .-1 (if they're who I think they are) is
one we've had some sucess with this tactic.
|
| 3952.5 | More on HP FUD | JALOPY::CUTLER | | Thu Jun 22 1995 07:56 | 15 |
|
Since I placed this entry in here, we've had an opportunity to find
out more. It turns out that the comparision was very unfair, the HP
numbers were for a client/server environment where the T500 was only
serving the database, the "user apps" were running "somewhere else".
Whereas our test results on the ALPHA included both the USER APPS and
DATABASE SERVER. Much different test criteria. I've been told that
we (Digital) are in the process of testing using the same scenario
as HP and that "we will blow them away"! :) We're trying to get a
copy of the FAX that was sent to the customer and use it to our
advantage on the account. We want to smear this (in a nice way ;)
in their face.
Rick C.
|
| 3952.6 | | NOVA::FISHER | now |a|n|a|l|o|g| | Thu Jun 22 1995 08:30 | 9 |
| Why not counter with the DEC numbers of 3692.02 transactions per second
at $4873 per tpsA numbers. that's over 13 million transactions per
hour on a standardized audited benchmark rather than a random roll your
own on whatever you do better test.
I know the 3692 number is over a year old, but it's still the record.
and there are comparable numbers for smaller configurations.
ed
|
| 3952.7 | | MRKTNG::SLATER | New DTN 381-2445 as of 4/24/95 | Thu Jun 22 1995 08:43 | 14 |
| SAP customers are demanding to see results from the SAP benchmarks, plain and
simple.
There are very few places on the planet where enough Alpha systems can be
brought together to act as application servers to saturate an AlphaServer 8400
eight-way database server, and the cost of doing so is quite high.
As a matter of expediency, the testing that was done and published so far
combined the database engine and application servers together. As was mentioned
this is being addressed.
Regards,
Marc
|
| 3952.8 | | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Thu Jun 22 1995 15:04 | 9 |
| The main reason to avoid using TPS numbers in an SAP opportunity is
they have no bearing on reality (but then again I'm one of theose that
believes that TPC numbers are useless in all situations) and HP is
using TPC-C's for FUD right now.
Marc's folks are on this and you should engage them if you need their
help (for that matter if you're working an SAP opportunity and you're not
using the SAP Expertise Center in ZKO and Marc's SPG performance folks
you're in trouble already).
|
| 3952.9 | Repeat after me | RDGENG::WILLIAMS_A | | Fri Jun 23 1995 05:30 | 3 |
| Turbolaser + SAP + Marc Slater's team = big trouble for competitors.
Commit to memory (.. shouldnt need 14G for that)
|
| 3952.10 | | MRKTNG::SLATER | New DTN 381-2445 as of 4/24/95 | Fri Jun 23 1995 08:14 | 6 |
| Norm, Adrian,
The checks are in the mail (or the cheques are in the post if you'd prefer):)
Thanks.
MS
|
| 3952.11 | Official Response | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Fri Jun 23 1995 12:09 | 356 |
|
The attached was prepared by SAP AG and Digital Equipment Corporation
in Germany in response to HP's misleading claims regarding the
performance of their machines.
Date: 23-Jun-1995 05:33am EDT
From: Bertram Mandel
MANDEL.BERTRAM AT MANIS2A1 AT FRAIS1 AT FRS
Dept: SAP EC
Tel No: [49](6227)-34-4560 DTN: 877-8139
TO: See Below
Subject: HP's R/3 Benchmark Results / Digital Positioning
Please distribute widely !
Dear all,
recently HP announced 'highest-ever R/3 Benchmarking' results. Please
use the positioning below to put the announcement into the right
perspective.
best regards
Christa Koppe Bertram Mandel
SAP Digital
[email protected]@Internet Bertram Mandel@FRA
++49-6227-34-3940 ++49-6227-34-4560
Comments to HP'S announcement:
"A Dog that you hit barks... (Barkign Dogs don't bite)"
1) HP used a new and specifically taylored SD Benchmark;
Dr. Zencke - Boardmember of SAP - announced at the SAP International
Logisitics Congress in Paris, that HP had used a new benchmark. So far
all other HW vendors used the standard R/3 SD Benchmark.
Using identical benchmarks could help customers to compare systems -
how useful is it to compare apples and oranges ?
2) The Benchmark was done on a unsupported Configuration
HP -again- benchmarked system configurations, that are not even
officially supported. The benchmark was run on HP-UX V10.0 Oracle
V7.1.4 R/3 V2.2c. This is not a supported combination.
Based on the actual matrix of supported configurations (dated June
23rd) R/3 V2.2c requires Oracle V7.0.16.6 and HP-UX V9.x.
HP-UX V10.0 / Oracle 7.1.4 will be supported by R/3 V2.2D+.
3) HP used Raw-Device instead of the filesystem
Due to the fact, that HP had servere problems with the Unix file
system, that constantly crashed when the benchmark was prepared, the
benchmark was run without the filesystem. Instead the 'raw-device' was
used (the first time ever) so far this is not a supported
configuration. SAP supports R/3 Databases only on file systems.
All System Management tools have been developped for file system based
R/3 implementations. Support for Raw-device is not officially announced
jet. According to SAP the support is planned only as an option in R/3
V3.0. (R/3 V3.0 General Availability is planned for the beginning of
CY1996)
The tests have shown, that using the raw-device results in 20-30%
performance increase compared to the file system. (And all the
trade-offs regarding data management, availability, etc. must be
accepted)
Question:
How will efficient management of large scale Databases / changing of
disks / desaster recovery be implemented without a robust filesystem
providing support for commercial applications ?
Is the availability / stability / management of critical data and it's
management less important to HP ?
How would using a filesystem impact the HP's announced performance ?
4) Stability of used Equipment
HP's original plans were to do a head-to-head benchmark with Digitals
Turbolaser benchmark, that was done in the beginning of April.
Due to technical problems the HP systems were not delivered in time. -
HP backed off the head-to-head benchmark and changed strategy.
When the newly announced systems arrived it took several days to just
install the machines, operating system, database and R/3 system.
Fatal errors occured and the systems crashed constantly. (See comments
on the file-system above)
Compared to that, the quality of the equipment that Digital used for
the benchmark resulted in pleasure and enthusiasm of the benchmark
team.
Digitals Turbolaser was installed from scratch within 5 hours; the
benchmarks started immediately.
Aside from the excellent performance, that the R/3-TL Benchmark showed,
the quality of the systems was a key criteria for SAP's CIO to finally
order TurboLasers for the development environment.
5) Host based vs. Client / Server
Digital benchmarked a host-based R/3 system using the standard SD
Benchmark.
The R/3 database as well as all R/3 application code was loaded on ONE
machine. (AlphaServer 8400 - 8 CPUs, 8GM Memory). This configuration
supported 36.000 SD Transactions / Hour.
The AlphaServer Performance was (36.000 / 8 CPU's):
4500 SD Transactions / Hour / CPU
HP benchmarked a Client / Server based R/3 system and used a
specifically taylored SD Benchmark.
(Please Note: Compared to the host-based R/3 installation the Client /
Server based implementation allows to take full advantage of dedicated
servers and thereby eliminates competing operations (i.e. Database
tasks vs. online tasks), that typically occur, if both tasks are run on
one system.)
The HP Benchmark Configuration was:
1 Database Server with 10 CPU's plus 46 Application Servers.
This configuration supports 108.000 SD Transactions / Hour.
The HP Performance is (108.000 / 56 CPU's):
1928 SD Transactions / Hour / CPU
The resulting relative Performance: ( DEC / HP )
4500 / 1928 = 2.33
Digital's AlphaServer (available/shipping) CPU outperformed HP's
hottest (not even available) CPU by a factor of 2.33 even though
HP used the 20-30%performance benefit of the unsupported
raw-device vs. filesystem implementation.
Taking the performance penalty into account, that result from the file
system based implementation compared to the un-supported raw-device
based benchmark, that HP did, the outperforming-ratio is even bigger.
(Asumption: 1928 T/h/cpu == 130% of a file system based benchmark;
1483 T/h/cpu == 100% of a file system based benchmark)
Result:
4500 / 1483 = 3.03
Digital's AlphaServer (available/shipping) CPU outperformed HP's
hottest (not even supported configuration) CPU by a factor of 3.03
based on a realistic comparison. (File system based, all benefits
of data Management for large scale implementations)
6) Performance / Comparison & Path forward
In order to prepare large scale benchmarks and eliminate infrastructure
limitations Digital is currently setting up it's R/3 Benchmark Center
in Walldorf.
The Benchmark Center will be equipped with 5 AlphaServer 8400 Systems
and several other AlphaServers plus High-speed Gigaswitch Network
technology. One of the first tasks of the benchmark center will be to
set-up a real high-end c/s benchmark for R/3.
Based on the experience with host based as well as client / server
benchmarks, the Team expects to announce soon that AlphaServer based
R/3 Client/Server systems again outperformed the closest competition by
the factor of 2.33, 3.03 (or better)
7) Migration free computing
Needless to say, that specifically large scale R/3 implementations
benefit most from the 64Bit Migration-free AlphaServer Technology.
On Digital's AlphaServers the Implementation of Productive R/3 systems
for multible hundreds (thousands) of users, supporting the mission
critical business applications will therefor not require:
- Hardware Migration
- Operating System Migration
- Database Migration
- Data Migration
- R/3 Migration
8) Cost of Ownership
In order to position the value of benchmarks and to apply it for a
decision making process it needs to be put into the overall context.
(How valuable is a benchmark, if the context does not fit?)
Typically R/3 customers implement the system to support critical
business applications for large portions of their enterprise.
System Performance as well as leading Price/Performance is important.
Even more important is the overall Cost of Ownership.
Recent analysis of an independant group (Alliance Development)
underlined the leading position of Digital Unix and the AlphaServer
Technology in commercial application environments.
The Digial Unix / AlphaServer combination clearly outperfoms HP-UX / PA
RISC systems in this analysis. Compared to an overall COO 28KUS$ of the
AlphaServer a comparable HP configuration results in more than 130KUS$.
This is a Factor of 4.6 !
HP's announcement follows:
HP AND SAP RELEASE HIGHEST-EVER BENCHMARKING ...
PALO ALTO, CALIF....BUSINESS WIRE -June 14, 1995--
Hewlett-Packard Company and SAP today announced the highest-ever
benchmark results for SAP's leading R/3 application suite and new SAP
market-share data for HP. Nine hundred users were recorded using SAP's
R/3 Sales & Distribution (SD) benchmark running on a UNIX(R)
system-based 10-way HP 9000 T500 Corporate Business Server. HP's
recently released midrange HP 9000 K-class servers also posted record
price/performance results.
"These benchmark results are indisputably the best we have ever
achieved for R/3, and they underline HP's position as the supplier of
the industry's leading open-systems platform," said Paul Wahl,
executive vice president for marketing at SAP AG. "We know that our
joint HP/SAP customers can expect the best performance and
price/performance combination and the highest return on investment. We
are extremely pleased with this outcome."
"Working with SAP to achieve this result is a major breakthrough for
our joint customers," said Carol A. Mills, general manager of HP's
General Systems Division. "However, both companies can offer more than
just the best performance. Our SAP-HP Competence Centers provide
customers with invaluable expertise for migration and implementation
assistance, and the recently announced HP/SAP Complementary Products
Center provides a range of associated products for joint customers in
areas such as network and systems management and application
interfaces."
In addition to the benchmark results, SAP announced that the growth of
HP customer sites running SAP R/3 continuously exceeds the nearest
competing hardware platform, averaging two new HP/SAP customer
installations per day over the last year. There are more than 1,400
worldwide HP/SAP installations, with more than 950 of these at end-user
customer sites -- 42 percent of SAP R/3 licenses run on the HP 9000
platform.
Benchmark Configurations
The benchmark environment was set up at SAP's worldwide headquarters in
Walldorf, Germany, by HP and SAP engineers. SAP measures the
performance of different hardware platforms with its own application
benchmark, which is based on the Sales & Distribution module of SAP
R/3.
A 10-way HP 9000 Corporate Business Server, set up in a client-server
configuration running HP-UX(1) 10.0, and the Oracle 7.1.4 RDBMS posted
the highest-ever SD benchmark performance recorded by SAP. Nine
hundred SD benchmark users were recorded on SAP R/3 2.2d with an
average response time below 2 seconds. In throughput terms, this
represents more than 108,000 transactions per hour.
In the midrange HP 9000 K-class server benchmark, a Model K400 system
-- (four-way symmetrical multiprocessing) with 2GB memory, HP-UX 10.0,
Oracle 7.1.4 RDBMS, SAP R/3 2.2c and the SD module -- was used in a
client-server configuration.
The results showed 360 SD benchmark users with an average response time
of 1.69 seconds (2 seconds is the 'maximum allowed response time'). In
throughput terms, this represents 43,344 transactions/hour.
These figures lead the industry in price/performance: The K-class
systems provide two-thirds of the performance of the nearest competing
midrange platform -- at just one-third of the price.
Founded in 1972, SAP AG has grown to become one of the largest
independent software companies in the world and is the market leader in
standard business software applications. The company, which is
headquartered in Walldorf, Germany, now employees over 6.200 people. In
addition to SAP AG in Walldorf/Germany the company is globally
represented by 26 subsidiaries and affiliates, four of which are in
Germany, as well as by 7 SAP partner companies. Those 34 companies
maintain offices in over 40 countries. With its standard systems, R/2
for mainframes and R/3 for client/server platforms, SAP serves over
4, 500 customers in over 50 different countries.
HP is the world's leading supplier of open, client/server systems and
is the second-largest computer supplier in the United States, with
computer revenue of $19.6 billion in its 1994 fiscal year. HP has been
delivering PA-RISC(2)-based business computers since 1986 with high
reliability, data integrity, data availability and systems
availability.
Hewlett-Packard Company is a leading global manufacturer of computing,
communications and measurement products and services recognized for
excellence in quality and support. HP has 98,600 employees and had
revenue of $25 billion in its 1994 fiscal year.
Note to Editors: SAP R/3 is a registered trademark of SAP AG. (1) HP-UX
9.X and 10.0 for HP 9000 Series 700 and 800 computers are X/Open
Company UNIX 93 branded products. UNIX is a registered trademark in
the United States and other countries, licensed exclusively through
X/Open(TM) Company Limited. X/Open is a trademark of X/Open Company
Limited in the UK and other countries. (2) PA-RISC stand for Precision
Architecture, reduced-instruction-set computing.
CONTACTS: HP Americas Bart Coddington, 408/447-1129
or
HP Europe, Germany Justine Steele, 49-7031-14-8059
Distribution:
TO: DIANE ALBANO @MKO
TO: MIKE ALLEY @KXO
TO: HECTOR BADILLO @MXO
TO: ELLEN BILLITER @COP
TO: FRANCOIS DICAIRE @MQO
TO: PAUL DIODATI @MXO
TO: DANIEL VON EHREN @IVO
TO: NANCY HAMILTON @CGO
TO: KARL HARRIS @PHH
TO: ED HEROLD @COP
TO: BILL HORZEMPA @MKO
TO: MARTIN HUEL @MQO
TO: LYNDA JONES @STO
TO: AVI LEV @IVO
TO: BOB LONGARIELLO @LAO
TO: DOUG LOTEN @TRO
TO: RICH LUCIANO @MKO
TO: DAVE MASON @CGO
TO: MAX MASTROCOLA @MQO
TO: SKIP MAUSER @IVO
TO: ENRIQUE MONTFORT @MXO
TO: CALVIN NOEL @NVO
TO: DON OSMUN @ACI
TO: MIKE PARKER @HSO
TO: BOB PEGAN @RCO
TO: DAVID PERRY @CBO
TO: TERRY POTTS @WRO
TO: Barbara Radelet @VAO
TO: GENE ROBINSON @ALF
TO: BOB ROCHE @NJO
TO: PAT SEITZ @CMO
TO: NORM SOLEY @TRO
TO: SANDY THOMPSON @WRO
TO: RICK VANI @TRO
TO: CHARLES WARDLAW @CGO
TO: LORI WINN @WRO
TO: GEORGE WONG @HGO
|
| 3952.12 | HP FUD OR SAP PLAYING BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET? | USCTR1::HUNTER | | Fri Jun 23 1995 16:04 | 13 |
| I am confused - in the last entry we have two documents either
originating in or written with the support of SAP that effectively
contradict each other.
The last document is a joint HP/SAP release touting the performance
of R/3 SD on HP vs. Alpha, and it is preceeded by a joint Digital/
SAP memo that positions the aforementioned document as "misleading".
Is this a conscious market ploy by SAP? Can't we manage our partner
relationships a little better than this?
Barrie
|
| 3952.13 | Friday afternoon flame... | POBOX::CORSON | Higher, and a bit more to the right | Fri Jun 23 1995 16:21 | 15 |
|
As a Channels Rep for years and years, I can only say "You've got to
be kidding."
Our partners are their own people, and they do what they damn well
feel like according to their business models, not ours. Until Digital
starts realizing you DO NOT manage partners, we will continue to
struggle in the reseller community.
Now having gotten that off my chest, try words like "co-operate", or
"support".
Have a good weekend all...
the Greyhawk
|
| 3952.14 | | ICS::VERMA | | Fri Jun 23 1995 16:34 | 6 |
|
The way I read it the second report dated 6-14-95 was issued by HP.
the first report dated 6-23-95 is a rebuttal to HP report jointly
issued by Digital and SAP. Thats the only way it makes any sense.
|
| 3952.15 | Not exactly supporting their own VP | NYAAPS::CORBISHLEY | David Corbishley 323-4376 | Fri Jun 23 1995 17:14 | 3 |
| I agree with .14 and would say that SAP really seems to be cutting
their VP (SAP person quoted in HP release) off at the knees. Ouch!
Looks like SAP internal issues as well.
|
| 3952.16 | Close rank, now! | CSOA1::STUTSON | | Sat Jun 24 1995 09:26 | 4 |
| The joint SAP/Digital response should be in every ABU/Distributors
reps hands within a week.
DS
|
| 3952.17 | | KLUSTR::GARDNER | The secret word is Mudshark. | Sat Jun 24 1995 12:11 | 6 |
| >> The joint SAP/Digital response should be in every ABU/Distributors
>> reps hands within a week.
hopefully with typos and grammar fixed...
_kelley
|
| 3952.18 | READ .11 More Closely | JALOPY::CUTLER | | Sun Jun 25 1995 08:14 | 9 |
|
If you read .11 more closely you'll see (in the rebuttal) that it
mentions that the Benchmark test ran by HP "is different" than what has been
run by "other vendors" (including us). It was unfair for the HP Sales Rep who
used it to compare it against our numbers, making them (HP) look real good in
the process and most importantly - (that we may be able to use against them)
MISLEADING THE CUSTOMER.
Rick C.
|
| 3952.19 | | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Sun Jun 25 1995 14:15 | 4 |
| Misleading all over the map. HP has been FUDing us for the past year
that "X is not certified by SAP" even when this was not true, now we're
caugth them at it themselves and I for one am enjoying pointing that
out to anyone that will listen.
|
| 3952.20 | HP FUD or FACT? (HELP) | FREMP::ACQUAH | | Mon Jun 26 1995 10:13 | 2 |
| why can't we setup our Tl the same way HP did then we can compare apples to
apples. that is HP FUD for Digital FUD. a very even playing field.
|
| 3952.21 | | MRKTNG::BURROUGHS | | Mon Jun 26 1995 17:30 | 15 |
| .11 contains our (Digital & SAP) rebuttal to the HP press release.
This was preprared in Waldorf by the Digital Expertise Center in
Cooperation with SAP.
The HP press release was also done in cooperation with SAP.
HP has been excellent in producing FUD against Digital and Alpha over
the last two to three years. The best tools we have here in the US is
the Expertise Center in Nashua NH. This center is managed by Lee Mari.
In Canada we have Rick Vani & Norm Soley. In Europe its Bertram
Mandel.
If you are competing for a SAP R/3 deal, you will do well to initiate
contact with one of the Expertise Centers.
|
| 3952.22 | yet another FUD from HP: no more UNIX from Digital | NAMIX::jpt | FIS and Chips | Tue Jun 27 1995 05:28 | 22 |
| SAP R/3 cases are typically large, and customers important, HP seems to
be ready to use any FUD available...
One of the latest HP FUD's we've seen at many customer sites is HP's claim
that development of Digital's UNIX product has ended. They back up the claim
by giving customer a press article that states that OSF/1 development has
ended.
One customer called us and told that they want to know what's behind this
and if what HP says is true (aka. Digital will support ONLY OpenVMS and
WindowsNT in near future). After we explained background of SPEC 1170,
Single UNIX Specification, X/Open and OSF, customer told us:
"Clearly HP has feed us with false information! Our mission
critical platforms can not be based on such vendor's products
whos word we can't trust"
Customer decided to buy their SAP R/3 platform from Digital... :-)
Best regards,
-jari
|
| 3952.23 | | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Tue Jun 27 1995 09:15 | 10 |
| HP is clearly getting desparate and they're grabbing at straws. If the
customer gives you the chance it's real easy to make them look silly
and then turn the tables on them with real facts they can't respond to.
As soon as the customer realizes they've been lied to the tide turns
our way real fast.
As for the last arguement also ask if the fact that OSF has stopped
further development means HP/UX is dead since there is enough OSF/1 in
HP/UX that they have to pay royalties to OSF for it?
|
| 3952.25 | "HP getting desperate," yah, right. | MSDOA::HICKST | | Tue Jun 27 1995 11:32 | 28 |
| RE: <<< Note 3952.23 by TROOA::SOLEY "Fall down, go boom" >>>
> HP is clearly getting desparate and they're grabbing at straws. If the
> customer gives you the chance it's real easy to make them look silly
> and then turn the tables on them with real facts they can't respond to.
I read statements like this and I don't know whether I should laugh out
loud or just groan in dispair.
DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, YOU ARE DRINKING YOUR OWN BATHWATER!!!
"Getting desperate?" They're now well over $20B/year and CLIMBING.
They just had a two-for-one stock split! Look at last weeks issue of
PC Week... they have an umpteen page advertorial with excellent
content, driving market perceptions that they are already the company
IBM wishes it could be. AND DON'T TELL ME ABOUT HOW DEAD-ENDED PA-RISC
IS! HP is selling more of those systems in a quarter than we sell in a
year. They are the market standard.
We, on the other hand, continue to show each other charts and graphs of
how great we're doing in the installed base...
Last thought. We sometimes rightfully point-out that HP gets a lot of
its revenues from medical equipment and printers. When throwing those
rocks, just remember HALF of our revenues for our glass house come from
services. And service vendors can be changed at the drop of a hat...
Ask any MCS sales rep how "loyal" our services customers are.
|
| 3952.26 | I'll have another cup of bathwater, please. | MSDOA::HICKST | | Tue Jun 27 1995 11:36 | 12 |
| >>We can easily make a win-win deal with IBM (an honorable company) to increase
>>both of our companies' businesses with Alpha technology. We could let HP have
>>it too, if they show some common sense and apologize for this FUD. But as long
>>as they are unfairly attacking us, why should we? Let's focus on making Alpha
>>and Digital Unix and NeXTstep so successful that Digital and IBM will pick HP's
>>bones, and all of HP's best engineers and marketing people and executives will
>>come running to us, begging for employment.
Somebody, please go to this guy's cube and let us know what he's
smoking, or popping, or drinking. Obviously a powerful hallucinogen,
certainly a controlled substance.
|
| 3952.27 | Ouch, life sucks, doesn't it. | NEWVAX::MZARUDZKI | I AXPed it, and it is thinking... | Tue Jun 27 1995 12:33 | 5 |
| re .25
Excellent note. Now about those charts and graphs.
-Mike Z.
|
| 3952.28 | Crosby's Rule #1 | USCTR1::CROSBY_G | | Tue Jun 27 1995 14:17 | 7 |
| re .25
A very simple rule:
If the number of customers isn't growing, the company is dying.
gc
|
| 3952.29 | HP earning momentum from last quarter | CSCMA::BALICH | | Tue Jun 27 1995 14:24 | 149 |
|
Folks - Note 3952.25 should be OUR wake up call ...
Here are the facts to back it up
p.s. 3952.25 was ***EXTREMELY*** generous with the HP's numbers, they are
much better than what he said ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
HP Net Earnings Up 41 Percent in Second Quarter
Orders Increase 27 Percent; Revenue Grows 19 Percent
Palo Alto, California. May 16, 1995
Hewlett-Packard Company (NYSE: HWP) today reported a 41 percent
increase in net earnings, 27 percent growth in orders and a 19 percent
rise in net revenue for the 1995 fiscal year's second quarter, which ended
April 30.
The company earned $577 million in the quarter, or $1.10 per share, on
approximately 526 million shares of weighted-average common stock and
common-stock equivalents outstanding. This compares with earnings of
78 cents per share in the same quarter a year ago. (The average number
of shares and equivalents used in computing net earnings per share has
been restated to reflect the retroactive effect of the March 1995
two-for-one stock split.)
Orders for the quarter totaled $8.1 billion, compared with $6.4 billion
in the year-ago period. U.S. orders rose 19 percent to $3.5 billion,
while orders from outside the United States grew 33 percent to $4.6 billion,
or 57 percent of the company's total.
Net revenue for the quarter was $7.4 billion, compared with $6.3
billion in the same period a year ago. Net
revenue in the United States was $3.1 billion, an increase of 12
percent compared with last year's second
quarter, while net revenue from outside the United States rose 24
percent to $4.3 billion.
We're pleased with many aspects of this quarter's performance," said
Lewis E. Platt, HP chairman, president and chief executive officer.
"Our earnings growth was excellent, and order growth was very strong and
well-balanced, with new products doing quite well. We also did a good
job of managing operating expenses.
We're disappointed, however, that our revenue growth was limited
somewhat by the effects of several product transitions, as well as by
some production and supply constraints."
******** Operations Review
Within the company's computer business, orders totaled $6.4 billion, an
increase of 28 percent over the year-ago quarter. Strong growth in PCs,
HP-UX (1) multiuser systems, LaserJet printers and customer support largely
drove the increase.
The company's strength in PCs was broad-based, with desktop machines,
servers and mobile PCs all achieving excellent increases. Aggressive
pricing, expanded distribution and the success of recently introduced
products were major factors in this growth.
Order growth for HP-UX multiuser systems was outstanding, with
particular strength in the telecommunications and manufacturing markets.
HP 9000 Series 700 workstations attained very good increases, with
midrange and high-end products particularly strong.
Demand for the company's consulting and systems-integration offerings
grew sharply, as did orders for information-storage products. Orders for HP
OpenView, the company's network- and systems-management platform,
increased very strongly.
LaserJet printers attained excellent order growth, passing the 15
million mark in LaserJet printers ordered since
their introduction in 1984. Demand for the LaserJet 4Plus and 4L
printers was strong, and initial orders for the
LaserJet 5P were very good. The timing of product transitions slowed
order growth for DeskJet printers this
quarter. DeskJets posted moderate growth compared with an outstanding
year-ago period, when important new products were available early in the
quarter.
The company's customer-support business attained excellent order
growth, with all geographies contributing.
Software support, outsourcing services and client-server network
integration were particularly strong.
The test-and-measurement business achieved 28 percent order growth.
Excellent demand for communications-test systems, board- and semiconductor-
test products, low-cost and digital-test
instruments, and consulting services fueled this growth.
Orders in the electronic-components business rose 25 percent compared
with the same quarter last year, with
strong growth in indicators and displays, fiber-optic components and
optocouplers. Medical-product orders
rose 11 percent, with good increases in demand for imaging products as
well as healthcare
information-management systems and services. The analytical-products
business achieved 8 percent order growth, with gas chromatographs posting
a very good increase.
*************** Six-month Review
For the six months ended April 30, net earnings increased 52 percent to
$1.2 billion, compared with $776 million
in the first half of 1994. Net earnings per share totaled $2.25
(restated to reflect the retroactive effect of the
March 1995 two-for-one stock split), an increase of 51 percent over the
$1.49 (restated) earned in last year's
first half.
Orders for the six-month period were $15.8 billion, an increase of 26
percent over the first half of 1994. U.S.
orders totaled $6.6 billion, an increase of 20 percent, while orders
from outside the United States were $9.2
billion, up 31 percent over a year ago.
Net revenue rose 23 percent over the first half of last year to $14.7
billion. Net revenue in the United States was
$6.3 billion, an increase of 17 percent over the year-ago half, while
net revenue from outside the United States
rose 28 percent to $8.4 billion.
*************** Business Outlook
"Demand for HP's products and services in the first half of 1995 was
outstanding," said Platt. "We're working closely with suppliers to
address the availability issues that affected us this quarter. We're also
focused on improving our production planning in order to meet demand more
effectively.
"The competitive environment is still intense, with pricing pressures
continuing across our markets. In addition,
there are signs that overall economic growth in the U.S. may be
slowing.
"We have exciting products, outstanding people and a solid track record
of helping customers succeed," said Platt. "In coming months we'll roll
out new products aggressively and work to extend our improvements in
expense and asset structures. We see a lot of opportunities for
profitable growth, and we believe we're well-positioned to compete for
them."
Hewlett-Packard Company is a leading global manufacturer of computing,
communications and measurement
products and services recognized for excellence in quality and support.
HP has 98,600 employees and had revenue of almost $30 billion in its 1994
fiscal year.
|
| 3952.32 | ..!.. | RDGENG::WILLIAMS_A | | Tue Jun 27 1995 16:03 | 2 |
| see 3950.51
|
| 3952.33 | | TROOA::SOLEY | Fall down, go boom | Tue Jun 27 1995 19:34 | 11 |
| HP is in good shape and they are often eating our lunch, no question
about it but, much like a certian company we all work for and few
others I can think of (think Sun in 1989) HP is starting to let their
success go to their heads, I've helped take business away from HP in
several accounts this quarter, three of these are off base for every
one on, the one comment that has come up in every case is that HP has
taken an arrogant or flipant attitute with every one of these customers
and the impression that Digital wanted and would work for the business
is the number one factor that turned them our way.
HP has a lovely statue but them feets are clay. Keep kicking.
|
| 3952.35 | HP is the leader, but we have improved ... | NAMIX::jpt | FIS and Chips | Wed Jun 28 1995 10:17 | 32 |
| > others I can think of (think Sun in 1989) HP is starting to let their
> success go to their heads, I've helped take business away from HP in
> several accounts this quarter, three of these are off base for every
> one on, the one comment that has come up in every case is that HP has
> taken an arrogant or flipant attitute with every one of these customers
Fully agree with this!
I've been involved in taking business away from HP, and I see
few reasons why:
- HP is coming arrogant (as we were and Sun is)
- Our products are _very_ competitive and exceed performance and
functionality in many cases where we used to be weak
- Our pricing is aggressive enough
- Our attitued is humble but we still have spine enough to argument
and talk in depth when bidding against HP
- and lately, maybe most of all, we have received very positive
publicity lately, and our overall image is improving all the time
(I hope this will be true after Q4 results :-)
For example TurboLaser and Gamma have been extreamly succesull
product during Q4 (at least here) when fighting against HP
offering as they have combination of World Class product and
strong positive image created by press and Oracle publicity.
Of course we should never forget that HP _is_ still the leader
in UNIX systems and they're riding on their success right now.
But this is not something that we hadn't seen ever before.
Best regards,
-jari
|
| 3952.36 | HP becoming arrogant! | MIMS::SANDERS_J | | Wed Jun 28 1995 11:18 | 10 |
| re. 33
In recent meetings with Jim Cassell of the Gartner Group, he told me
that HP was becoming arrogant. In recent weeks, several customers have
passed this information along to Gartner, who in turn has passed along
the information to senior HP management.
A friend of mine, from another company, recently interviewed with HP
and told me he could not believe how arrogant they were in the
interview. They offered him a job, but he turned it down.
|
| 3952.37 | former customers remember | BROKE::SERRA | You got it, we JOIN it....DBI | Wed Jun 28 1995 17:37 | 14 |
| -< HP becoming arrogant! >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent meetings with Jim Cassell of the Gartner Group, he told me
that HP was becoming arrogant. In recent weeks, several customers have
passed this information along to Gartner, who in turn has passed along
the information to senior HP management.
A friend of mine, from another company, recently interviewed with HP
and told me he could not believe how arrogant they were in the
interview. They offered him a job, but he turned it down.
Sounds like DEC in the early 80's, I guess they are heading for
bad times. DECCies were not easy to deal with back then!
|
| 3952.38 | HP Q3 Results | MIMS::SANDERS_J | | Thu Aug 17 1995 13:09 | 12 |
| re. -1
So much for HP heading for bad times. Here are there Q3 results:
Profits up 66% to $576 million,
Revenue up 28% to $7.7 billion,
Orders up 34%.
Maybe they can afford to be arrogant.
|
| 3952.39 | no slouches they | WHOS01::ELKIND | Steve Elkind, Digital Consulting @WHO | Fri Aug 18 1995 00:32 | 16 |
| HP is aggressive as h*ll in the field, at least as I've been seeing in
my little corner of the world. They are more willing to throw
resources at large system sales opportunities than we are, and
apparently their rules of engagement allow more investment, risk, and
long-term payback than ours do.
Sometimes it's not just the technical edge that wins. Although we
lead them in many ways with Alpha, they are still well into the
"acceptable" range and definitely make QUALITY products - and enjoy a
large very satisfied installed base.
Yes, we can beat them - we have products that are as good and some that
are superior (e.g., Alpha). But they ain't no slouches, and they ain't
in trouble. In my (humble, of course) opinion, we need to enable our
sales folk to be equally or more aggressive, and to free them of an
environment that only rewards short-term behavior.
|