Conference 7.286::digital

    I am confused.    In what context did IBM state that there is a 
    huge yearly support contract?   Were they talking about their boxes
    in that context?  I would think a support contract of a 2100 server or
    even a 8000 server would be much less that the millions paid for a 
    contract to support a 30 or 40 series mainframe.  
    
    On the point about lack of applications - (this is funny) IBM CICS
    (Customer Information Control System - its been around for 25 years
    and has 3 billion line of code in production) is available on the AXP
    platform thru IBM and Digital.   Funny - in a recent class given by
    IBM the instructor (from IBM) eluded to the price differences and the
    lack of reasons for mainframe based machines anymore... 
    
    .0  "..lack of other Alpha native apps that a customer would want. " 
    
    now go figure - I forgot the current number but ALOT of vendors are
    now on OpenVMS AXP and Digital UNIX.

    I think they were figuring the support for the Alpha server plus
    a zillion user workstations vs. one IBM mainframe, at least as I
    read it.
    

>    IBM the instructor (from IBM) eluded to the price differences and the
    				   ^^^^^^
    
    IBM's good at that! :^]
    
    								Tex

    Ken McDonnell, MSBCS::MCDONNELL_K, is p.r. for turbolaser.  I'll send
    him this sequence (and hope that he doesn't kill me for mentioning his
    name here...nah, nevermind, if you're in p.r. presumably you like
    seeing your name mentioned :-)
    
    I agree that someone should talk to Byte, hopefully Ken can round up
    the right rebuttal.
    
    	/john henning
         csd performance group

    
    I love this game, so, do they figure the cost of every 3270 terminal
    and PC with EICON card etc.? You know the game, compute engine cost
    versus total solution, dedicated front ends versus proportion of
    a general PC or workstation. The issue can be real muddy.
    Or, you can figure the front end as a sunk cost in both instances and
    concentrate on the cost of providing the capability.

    From the Digital Semiconductor Q3 Business meeting, there are currently
    over 6000 applications that run on Alpha.

    see 3950.51

re -.1;

While I agree with your sentiments, I'm afraid the approach you're taking to the
problem won't yield anything you'd regard as a satisfactory solution. This being
a free society, Mr.Newton has virtually unlimited rights to blather on about his
cockamamie idea.


\dave

    
    
    I think one of the Gartner Group services does cost-of-ownership
    analysis for a living; how about pulling off these comparative
    analysis from the MRC (Merket reserach center)? Digital spends
    OODLES of $$$/year with GG, so let's use their unbiased opinions.
    BTW from what's been reported, it has been rather positive for
    Digital.
    
     

    Agreed.
    
    And further to 3950.52, the US certainly is the home of the brave, and
    land of the free, but I don't want too many entries in this conf turned
    into why XXXX Company should flog Alpha. At a minimum, makes for
    a boring conference - regardless of any sense of reality the
    suggestion may not have.
    
    Many, many of the base entries in here relate to the computer
    industry (quelle surprise !), and how we fit in it. Panacea of '..hey,
    just get rest of world to sell Alpha....'... Please,
    
    
    
    AW.
    
    
    
    

>                    <<< Note 3959.8 by RDGENG::WILLIAMS_A >>>
>                                   -< ..!.. >-
>
>    see 3950.51
    
    ...then check the reply to same.  It takes a lot of nerve and a
    fantastically inflated ego to suggest that, because you personally
    aren't fascinated or in agreement with something, that it should be
    write-locked.  If boorishness was excuse for deletion, 3950.51 and
    3959.8 would be in the bit bucket.
    
    Try NEXT UNSEEN like the rest of us.

>    And further to 3950.52, the US certainly is the home of the brave, and
>    land of the free, but I don't want too many entries in this conf turned
>    into why XXXX Company should flog Alpha. At a minimum, makes for
>    a boring conference - regardless of any sense of reality the
>    suggestion may not have.

	Tom has still right to express his view, and setting his topics
	as write locked would be against his rights. Totally different
	things is that how should Tom share his views, and if I or 
	someone else agrees on what he says.

	Personally I am strongly against limiting Tom's possibilities when
	he wishes to communicate his ideas as long as communication falls
	in topics related to conference he uses (a'la Notes and News etiquette).

	If Tom's way of communicating offends you, you can always send
	him constructive personal mail explaining your view. Other possible
	way could be using some news reader to read your conferences and
	add unwanted authors to yuor personal kill file.

	Best regards,

		-jari