Conference 7.286::digital

    Did we/are we bidding for this business (and future opportunities)

So, is the government fawning over Bill Gates or Rupert Murdoch
the most?

    
    	Got a friend who was completely submerged in this deal the last
    six months, it is major beyond anything we have seen for a long time.
    
    	Basically it means that UNIX in the Federal Government (the world's
    largest end-user) is DEAD; with Microsoft Back Office, Front Door, and
    Exchange the *new* preferred O/S and communications background. It is
    all over for UNIX, folks, we can stick a fork in it.
    
    	Ten years from now UNIX is just a memory at the Computer Museum
    like CP/M, RSTS, and the rest....
    
    	Scott Neely must be doing some serious thinking today...
    
    
    			the Greyhawk
    

    Well, no sense stickin' a fork in it yet, as the fat lady's only
    clearing her throat...but I can't say that ruling was a huge Unix
    success.
    
    As Greyhawk so ably noted, there's a "dead software" museum out there,
    which includes:
    
    	* RPG ("Learn it *now*, it's the wave of the future")
    
        * PASCAL ("PASCAL will have replaced all COBOL code by 1990")
    
        * PIC ("The portable operating system takes over")
    
    Anyone that thinks UNIX doesn't have a place waiting for it is probably
    kidding themselves.  Yesterday's technology, today's fad, tomorrow's trash.
    The only thing certain in this business is change.
    
    								Tex

    ...and just so no one thinks I'm prejuidiced, I have *no* illusions
    that VMS, OpenVMS, and the rest won't be resting beside it someday.
    
    								Tex
    
    (I really don't give a flying .... *what* it runs, as long as the
    customer wants it, thus keeping me in Wheaties!)

I wonder how much of our UNIX revenue actually comes from the US Gvt? In
particular when our FY95 ending indicated that only 35% of our overall
revenue comes from the US. Any idea what the spread is for Digital UNIX?

And besides, we're a hardware company. What difference does it make if
they run VMS, WNT, UNIX or OS/2 on our stuff? We can still sell them the
same boxes.

>Per

>    	Ten years from now UNIX is just a memory at the Computer Museum
>    like CP/M, RSTS, and the rest....
    
that's what people were saying over and over 10 years ago.  It's mushroomed
since then, and will probably continue to do so.

Chris.

It is interesting that a significant part of Digital takes such joy
in the projected demise of UNIX!

Ram

    re .7
    
    I also remember pundits saying that UNIX was the next big thing, over
    and over, ten years ago. Every year since has been both the year that
    UNIX finally takes off, and also the year that UNIX dies.
    
    Clive

    Ram, old boy, it ain't joy.  It's the "Product Life Cycle", Business
    101.
    
    Your Brownie camera is now a museum piece.  It's resting comfortably by
    your Atari, your reel-to-reel, your turntable, the non-Digital clock,
    your "Tuning Your Hemi" manual, your Beta machine...
    
    It all comes and goes, Ram, that's about the only thing you can count
    on.  Hell, I *loved* my '56 DeSoto ("with new Chrysler AirTemp!"), but
    it's an anachronism in today's environment.  "Polyester, the Wonder
    Fabric" was going to revolutionize the clothing industry, coffee
    percolators aren't too common anymore, it's hard to find audio modems
    (remember, "push the handset into the holder.."?), hi-fi stereos... 
    The list goes on.
    
    I'm not knockin' Unix, Ram, and I tried to make that clear.  But it's
    just another line in the product mix and, like all such, will
    eventually be found only in old, old copies of "Computer
    World"...before the computer industry switched to organic memory cells
    and the new User-Profiled Memory System...which, upon its introduction,
    will also have a place waiting for it in the Obsolete Products Museum.
    
    								Tex
    
    God, some people are touchy!  Buy larger underwear.... :^]

I still think that there will be a place in large DataCentres for Unix
and VMS for some time to come yet.  Even when (and if!) NT proves itself
to be a competent solution, I think that there are too many people out
there who favour other operating systems, whether this is because of
allegiance, skillsets, installed base or whatever, for the `old fashioned'
systems to fade away, or even slow down development on them.  (and I
still think that fitting a TurboLaser with a super-VGA card sounds like
an, er, curious idea!)

Chris.

To me it seems over-stated that UNIX is dead.  Come on, even MVS still has a
large user base, and IBM is making money off of it hand over fist.

But there has got to be champagne flowing in Redmond WA today!  Now NT can
compete head-to-head with the big boys in the U.S. government space.

IMHO, there are groups that clearly benefit from this decision, groups that
don't care very much, and groups that are clearly hurt.

The groups that are clearly hurt are companies like Sun, ie, those companies 
for whom UNIX is their only offering.  IBM is partially in this group because
of their refusal to offer NT on their systems, but only partially because
they can offer other O/Ss.

Groups that don't care include HP and Digital, both of whom can offer solid
NT (and in our case OpenVMS) solutions along with their solid UNIX solutions.
I think that Digital is helped slightly by the combination of this decision
and the Microsoft/Digital agreement just announced, such that we can sell
Alpha hardware in this market and so have an advantage in the performance wars.

The groups that clearly benefit are Microsoft and the marketplace in general.
Now there is another O/S on the market which is politically acceptable, such
that technical people in the government and in private industry can recommend
without fearing for their jobs.  And in our free enterprise system, anything
which sparks competition is good.

I think about it this way: 30 years ago nobody ever got fired for recommending
IBM.  Today nobody gets fired for recommending "open systems" (which usually
translates to mean your vendors version of UNIX).  Well, NT just became an
"open system", which means more and more people in the U.S government and in
private industry and are going to recommend and buy it.  This will simply
accelerate the market share of NT at the expense of everything else.

Do I think that this is the death-knell for UNIX?  No, but the hand-writing
is on the wall.  I have been stating for over a year now that some flavor of
NT will eventually (within 25 years) be the overwhelmingly dominant O/S on 
the market, relegating all others (all flavors of UNIX, MVS, OS/2, OpenVMS)
to either history or tiny (<1%) niches.  To me this is just another proof 
point for that prediction.

-- Ken Moreau

COBOL and Fortran are still widely used.  RPG isn't.  I don't think it's easy
to predict what's going to be around 10 or 20 years hence.

What I want to know is, if Windows NT takes off in a big way in DataCentres
over the next 10 to 20 years, what will they call it?  I don't see large
data servers being fitted with integral graphics screens, so windows is
out, and it'll hardly be `new' technology any more.  How about `character
cell OT'? :)

Chris.

> (and I
> still think that fitting a TurboLaser with a super-VGA card sounds like
> an, er, curious idea!)

And I suppose "fitting it" with a character-cell serial console paying homage
to the width of cards for the 1890 US census makes more sense?

>                                                      I don't see large
>data servers being fitted with integral graphics screens, so windows is
>out
    
    With the cost of any lowly VGA controller and accompanying monitor
    being next to nothing, I don't see any reason why they wouldn't
    have that or [much] better (many do already).
    
    Given that such systems today are starting to sport the PCI bus
    (take, e.g., the AlphaServer 8xxx series), and operating systems
    such as Windows NT and OpenVMS already have VGA support...
    
    ...petri

yeah, but it's, uh, traditional to fit large dataservers with LN03s...

Chris.

Hey, my Beta VCR still works - it's the VHS that gathers dust on my shelf....

				Steve

    Looks like today's announcement of the expanded Digital/Microsoft
    relationship could not have come at a better time.

   We recently won a project to deliver Alphas with NT and undertake SI for the 
   UK's Ministry of Defence Procurement Executive (MoDPE). Some 25-30 
   AlphaServers will eventually support up to 6� thousand PC (Pentium) desktops 
   running NT.
 
   Relatively small beer in comparison with the US Coastguard at @ $5m+ by the 
   time we've added-in the extras they're talking about. However, it is of 
   MAJOR importance in terms of acceptance of NT in an influential section of 
   the Government - a body who only specify/buy Open (UNIX) Systems. Many eyes 
   are watching developments and are likely to jump on the bandwagon as/when it 
   takes off and proves itself.
 
   Other associated areas of Government - like the Agencies - are "dabbling" 
   with NT - I think we can expect the flood (Bill) gates to open before long. 
   (sorry 'bout that one !)
 
   Rog

    
    re .14
    
    'Windows' NT functionality in terms of OS services is what will make it 
    sell. It is not tied to having graphical windows appear on a vga
    screen.

    Before we kill off unix... the projected marketshare by '99 is 40% with 
    NT as the other 40% leaving 20% for niche types of computing.
    
    Let's let the market decide which of Digital's OS's has the best chance...
    
    And sell the customer, gov, student what they want -- on one of our
    platforms...
    
    At one one time the US Gov was dictating that OSI was the only network
    for them... The more things change...
    
    
    John Wisniewski

    
    .. and whatever happens, we will continue to have 100% of the VMS
    market, for however long it lives...
    
    open schmopen. never understood it anyway.

>    .. and whatever happens, we will continue to have 100% of the VMS market

Given that Aspen, Nekotech, etc. also sell OpenVMS systems, then we should at
least hope to have a commanding lead in the VMS market, albeit not 100%.

    Add Amdahl to that list...they've been sucking up some of our talent
    lately.  *Still* a commanding lead, though! :^]

  What makes the proliferation and acceptance of NT so attractive for
  Digital is that Alpha is *already* noted as the price/performance 
  leader however wide scale application acceptance (isv) was/is a
  hindrance.

  Now, the industry as a whole is endorsing Windows NT. Microsoft
  has just endorced Digital. The more NT sells,  the more Digital will 
  sell Alphas (and Servive) and this will attract more ISVs to port to
  Alpha.

  This has immense potential. It's ironic that a 3rd party OS might
  remake Digital again. You could say that Windows NT is the Unix
  of the 90s and Digital is very well poised to sell alot of hardware,
  service and value added.

  Watch the stock ...

It would be interesting to see if the justice department uses NT systems
during their investigation of Microsoft.  Think they can come to an impartial 
decision?

jb

>> Hey, my Beta VCR still works - it's the VHS that gathers dust on my shelf....
    
    mine too, I've had several VHS m/c's all of which ar crap by
    comparison, and _always_ fail within 18 months of purchase....
    
    Graham

    just remember Dave Culter did VMS and Windows NT, digital is
    still the winner no matter how you look at it....

RE: the last several notes on Betamax machines being better

It seems to me that you are validating my point: the other technology is in
fact superior to the successful product, but only in ways that an extremely
tiny fraction of the market cares about.

And notice that most people who praised their Betamax machines *ALSO OWN
A VHS SYSTEM*!  From the retailers/manufacturers point of view, they have
no way of knowing that you love your Betamax and the VHS system is gathering
dust.  To them you appear as a satisfied VHS customer, further (artificially)
shrinking the perceived Betamax share of the market.

The same thing can be said of the OS/2 market: lots of incredibly satisfied
customers who swear (with many sound and valid reasons) that OS/2 is better
than MS-Windows.  But in terms of market share, OS/2 is an extremely tiny
fraction of the market, and getting smaller every day (like next Aug 24th).

The point of this rat-hole is to make the point that technology is important,
in that your product must meet some minimum level of functionality before it
can be considered viable.  But real marketing consists of determining the
true needs of the market (2 hours on a single tape, lots of native apps, ease
of installation because it came pre-installed on the system), rather than
some esoteric technology which only a few people can understand and even
fewer people care about.  And real marketing (as successfully done by the
VHS people and Microsoft) will win over superior technology (as successfully 
done by Sony in Betamax, IBM in OS/2 and Apple in Macintosh) will win every 
time in the consumer market.

What does this mean for Digital (he said, trying desperately to make this
relevant in some minor way to the DIGITAL notesfile)?  Well, to me it means
that Alpha is not a consumer product: too expensive and the Pentium-90 has
more performance than people need today for the home (and by the time the
apps get big and fat enough to consume a Pentium, Intel will have the next
generation of chip all ready for them).  Yes Alpha is better from a technical
viewpoint, but only in ways that consumers don't care about: the ability to
run multiple operating systems, support for multiple floating point formats,
and speed far above Pentium.

It also means that our agreement with Microsoft, along with the recent decision
by the U.S. government that NT is an "open system", is exactly what we need to
sell Alpha in the business space, because there our advantages are valuable,
because businesses can employ the few people who understand and value the
esoteric technical details to recommend the best solution.

Whoever came up with the Microsoft/Digital alliance, you have my thanks and
appreciation.  You will also have the thanks and appreciation of all of our
stockholders, since this is going to do great things for our company.

-- Ken Moreau

Re: .29

If you knew more about Dave Cutler's "contributions" to VMS and other products,
you might have a different opinion.....

					Steve

    Besides, if you try to reflect Cutler's accomplishments back to
    previous employment, then isn't DuPont the real winner?

    re: .31
    
    maybe so but it's paid my bills and raised a family for 28 years...

Re: .33

What has raised a family for 28 years?

Don't misunderstand - I like VMS a lot - I'm just trying to debunk the common
myth that Cutler was single-handedly responsible for all that's good in VMS
and therefore NT should be wonderful as well.  If NT is successful, it will
not be because of Cutler.

					Steve

Re: .35

It wasn't.  What's your point?

			Steve

> Don't misunderstand - I like VMS a lot - I'm just trying to debunk the common
> myth that Cutler was single-handedly responsible for all that's good in VMS
> and therefore NT should be wonderful as well.  If NT is successful, it will
> not be because of Cutler.

Oh, I dunno.  At least he gets things to ship.

(Actually, the rumours that I hear say that Microsoft programmers
 fall into two camps, the 'professionals' and the 'cowboys'.
 Cutler apparently falls into the former category, as far
 as MS is concerned :-)

    Nonononono.  What's MY point, is the question here!  Isn't it?  Or did
    I already point that out?  Wait.  Is this pointless?

    re: .39
    
    your right
    
    the only thing I pointed out was:
    
    	1) dave culter dir vms
    
    
    	2) dave culter did windows/nt
    
    	3) this is good for digital
    
    
    
    the only thing .31/.34 pointed out was...
    
    		who knows????
    
    
    

    I pointed out that your belief that "Dave Cutler (note correct
    spelling) 'did' VMS" was mistaken.  Furthermore, the identity of the
    project leader of VMS V1.0 (or of NT V3.5) has nothing to do with
    much of anything.
    
    					Steve

What troubles me about this UNISYS win, is that Digital nobid this 
program. One of the reasons was that we felt that an Alpha Windows NT
solution was not going to meet the requirements of the Coast Guard.
It is too bad that we didn't decide to stick with this program and bid 
the our NT solution.

[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

    re: .41 
    your right...!!! I cant type...got cutler's name wrong...
    don't know squat....
    
    
    
    

    re: .41
    
    after 28 years in this company there are a few people that I know 
    have made digital what it is because of their contributions...
    
    I'm a nobody but a few of them I know about, as does anybody who 
    knows the history of digital:
    
    		ken olsen
    
    		dave cutler
    
    		gordon bell
    
    		don white
    
    		ed decastro
    
    these people made a difference...they helped make digital...
    
    as did many others who never got any recognition...
    
    IMHO
    
    
    

    
    Re .44 and .45
    
    Larry you need to get over your troubles. :^) Digital in the government
    (US of A) is in trouble. We cannot seem to figure out what to go after
    and how to get it. We constantly reinvent our bid teams. We constantly
    miss opertunities. The coast guard contract is another prime example of
    us missing the boat. A nobid. Now look what has happened with it.
    The Microsoft/digital alliance can really help us out in this federal
    place. But we really need to get our business development process in
    order first.
    
    -Mike Z.

    various duplicate notes in the .40 to .49 range of this topic have been
    deleted due an apparent overzealous News-notes gateway program.
    
    Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL