Conference 7.286::digital

	This is been going on for over a year now.

	We (DIGITAL) sub contracted to get a new system installed
	for the city.  This is/was suppose to replace the old
	Honeywell system(s).  It is suppose to tie in all the
	departments of the city.  Completion date  July 1995.

	Latest info is that Digital will continue to pay the city
	for costs to continue using Honeywell system.

	I live in Worcester, and this is really a black-eye for
	Digital.  Worcester threatened to do a national publicity
	ad campaign against us, but Digital made some concessions
	and the city relented..  IMHO, Digital has made a big mess
	of this..

From:	LESREG::HOTLNE::CAHILL "WB3CUU/1  11-Sep-1996 0846" 11-SEP-1996 08:46:58.88
To:	DI
CC:	CAHILL
Subj:	Post this in the Digital file if you would like.... 


  Mr. Palmer,

    Good Morning, I just wanted to let you know of the negative press 
Digital has received today on WTAG radio, Worcester. The report was that 
the City will try to embarrass Digital into the effort to get the Digital 
systems working. The report was aired at 6:30AM which is not the way to 
start the day. I am sure other reasons were not aired but the message of 
negative press on Digital was loud and clear.

    Some years ago I brought an issue up to Corporate regarding Digital 
equipment that would not work for the New Jersey Transit...within one week 
the issue was addressed and we have a happy customer.

    Could you help with this situation. I, like others take pride in Digital
and to hear this first thing in the morning is disturbing. I am also a 
reserve Police officer in the town of Oxford, Ma. and promote our products 
whenever possible.

    Thanks for taking the time to read this.

     Lee Cahill
     Sr. Equipment Engineer, 
     Fab6 Hudson

    
    What, exactly, is the holdup on this?
    Is it DIGITAL malfunctions, or application difficulties?

    
    This has also been discussed in note 4102 for background information. I
    really, really wish someone/anyone at this point would FIX whatever
    problem Worcester is having and make them a happy customer.  We have
    received enough bad press from this for to long now.  We hear in on the
    radio and there was also an article in the newspaper this past Monday.
    Worcester also has some committee meeting televised where we have also
    received bad press.  
    
    Dianne

>    Worcester also has some committee meeting televised where we have also
>    received bad press.  
    

I bet THAT'S one that got a world wide audience.

Rest assured that very few people know what a worcester is.

    That must be one huge system, if they have been installing it for over
    a year.  I installed the {in my opinion} worse piece of crap that
    digital ever made, 11/782 at Rockwell in LA over the weekend, we teamed
    up on it, and even had to determine where cables went, make cables, and
    correct the documentation.  It was working on Monday morning.  
    
    Some one is milking that job, the only installation that should be over
    a month, would be a complete site, and the planner should have all the 
    items detailed, and cables pulled by contractors, electrical ready in
    advance, then it is just plug and play.  
    
    Dave

    
    
    -1. 11/782 do we still have spares for this system????
    
    What so difficult to a make GOOD action plan for that site,
    this story is going on for a long time, I think some people in DEC
    has to have a kick under there A.., 
    What is the Account manager doing about this, is he sleeping or is he a
    newhire in the Company.
    Put a Site Resident Engineer over there to control these problems.
    
    Good luck
    
    Cor

    Yes it is unbelievable, just like the report that we have customers who
    do us the honour of phoning us up and have to wait for an hour for an
    answer. Have we lost our pride in ourselves or what ? Would the CEO
    please sort this out ? Whatever it takes. This story running parallel
    with the big advertising campaign is a variety of the Ford Edson
    syndrome.  It makes the advertising campain money down the drain, big
    time. The worst thing is, that the story has returned. Once was bad,
    twice is unforgivable.
    
    Kevin

    re .5
    
   > Rest assured that very few people know what a worcester is.
    
    Please, the press is bad enough. And very few non-Worcesterites even
    know how to pronounce wooster, worchester, etc... However, being 
    born and bred there some 50 odd years ago, I have found in my travels,
    that there are a number of people who at least know of Worcester
    and its approximate location. 
    
    Today when I'm asked where I live and I say Worcester Ma, people will 
    respond with, thats near Boston isnt it, or oh ya I know where that is.
    Whereas in the past a Worcester response got a blank stare, until you
    said Boston as a back up. Then the light would come on. Not for the
    fact that they thought Boston was near Worcester, but that they knew 
    where Boston was. They still had no idea of Worcester. The Centrum has
    at least made the place known to some outside of Mass. And yes a local
    TV station may not get much outside coverage. But if the city council 
    makes enough of a stink, it could be a possible pick up on some 
    other TV stations that do capture  wider audiences.
    
    I was involved in this for only a small fraction of the Problem.
    In Jul 1993, as mentioned in an earlier note. So this been going
    on for some time. The write up in the Local Paper this morning has
    the city manager holding off the city council from taking us to court.
    Part of his reasoning is that we are paying the City of Worcester's
    monthly bill of $36,000 monthly to the other vendor, while we try to get 
    this straightend out.
    
    Bob
                    

I do not mean to add more negativism but I hope Digital can get some positive
press on this situation just in case any of these folks happens to read the
newspaper in Worcester while they are here.

	A few facts that I know:

	This program is replacing a large legacy system that's been around 
	for God knows how long.  The system supports many departments in 
	the city, includng the Accounting department.  Apparently, City 
	accounting isn't easy.  Digital is the prime contractor on this 
	program.  The City of Worcester selected the S/W package.  The
	package out of the box does not provide everything that Worcester
	wants, which is the exact functionality the old system gave them.
	The S/W company said they could handle the changes...NOT.

	This is all from someone I know that works for the City of Worcester
	and is involved in the project.  They shall remain nameless.  However,
	I was told directly that Digital is not the sole cause of the problem.
	The S/W company and Worcester themselves are contributory as well.
	Of course, since the S/W company is small, publically blaming them does
	no good.  And the City Manager isn't going to stand up and say it's
	their own fault.

	Re: - TV coverage....The Worcester City Council meetings are broadcast
	on a local access channel every Tuesday evening.

    
        -1. 11. 11/782 do we still have spares for this system????
    God, I hope that we do not need these any longer.  I installed that
    prior to 1984... probably 1982 or 83.  
    
    For a $7.0 meg system, I would suppose that you need terminals, maybe
    some fiber optic cables, and some power conditioning equipment.  I
    would contract out everything except the actual installation, and I
    believe if done properly 2 weeks to a month is adequate for a proper 
    checkout.
    
    Dave

    re: software to work just like the other that it replaces.
    
    I had a model t and I want the Madza to go Oooogha just like that.
    
    Customer should be willing to change within reason.  Even the Forces
    do.
    
    Dave

    I've read this stream with a little bit of amusement.  I'm not in the
    MCS or s/w orgs, nor am I a real salesperson (but I do play one on TV.) 
    Notwithstanding, the assumption on my part, particularly since you are
    dealing with a legacy Honeywell system, is that software is the main
    problem.  Everyone saying it should take a weekend tops to install the
    hardware is correct, but I would venture a guess that hardware is not
    the issue.
    
    The real issues are probably two-fold - expectations on the customers
    parts, and oversold capabilities on Digital's part.  Particularly when
    you deal with a software environment like legacy Honeywell
    applications, I would guess the knowledge level in Digital is somewhat
    minimal.  Couple that with salespeople eager to win the business for
    goaling purposes, software folks eager to do finish the job quickly
    (with little expertise and charging exorbitant fees to boot), and
    management on to the next integration effort, and you have the makings
    of a debacle.  And the fact that the local politicians have a bully
    pulpit like they have through TV, and Digital probably should never
    have taken on this business.
    
    I'll end by saying it gladdens my heart to know that each profitable 
    sale I make, or each expense I avoid, will help to make it easier to 
    pay that $36000/month tab we are ringing up for this headache.
    
    Chuck 
                                                                           

    The City of Worcester project started in 1991. It involved a city wide
    LAN over the cable TV, a dozen or so systems, many PC's, file servers.
    There were applications for Schools, Police, Fire, all city admin,
    payroll, etc etc. 
    
    a VERY big project, originally laid out as a 3 year program. Not quite
    your 'install a system' even as complex as an 11/782.
    
    It was bid as all VMS, but one application vendor switched to Unix
    about half way thru the install. 
    
    The problem area is with an application vendor, but since we are the
    contractor, we take the flak.

     
    -15
    Somebody made very bad agreement with the vendor who has changes to
    another operating system, you have to keep him at his contract.
    Off course DEC should have a chapter in the contract with the
    vendors that if THEY are late, THEY have pay the cost and NOT digital.
    But anyway its stupid that nowbody did something when the vendors
    moves over to another operating system. ( Bad management????? )
    
    Cor

    re: .5
    
    Just because you don't think people know where Worcester is doesn't
    mean that bad press won't have a negative impact on Digital.
    The fact that some Digital employees have heard about it and
    are telling other Digital employees about the bad press will
    probably harm morale and confidence within our company at a time when
    morale is already low and confidence in upper management is already
    in question.
    
    Although, I would like to know who I should talk to about getting
    the city of Worcester their own case of bad press.  Have you ever
    driven through downtown ?  Park Ave, Highland St, Main St.  The
    road repairs are always shotty and the some side streets you can easily
    loose a hubcap on from some of the potholes.  Perhaps Digital is
    pacing the installation of the new computer system with the city's 
    street repair projects...in that case both should be fixed...ummm
    never.
    
    Shane, who lived in Worcester for 5 years.

    
    	Not to mention 146 between Rte. 20 and Rte. 290 ... that's
    	been horrible for as long as I can remember and it's not get-
    	ting any better.
    

re .61  

What's happening?

>Digital gives Worcester a March pledge
>
>By Nick Kotsopoulos
>Telegram & Gazette Staff
>
>WORCESTER _ Digital Equipment Corp. now intends to have the city's new and
>long-delayed $7.8 million computer system fully operational by March 1,
>1997.
>
>Uday Kumaraswami, vice president of Heritage Services for Digital, assured
>the City Council last night his company is committed to working with city
>officials to meet the deadline.

    .61>                        -< Nov 13 T$G Article >-
    
    > WORCESTER _ Digital Equipment Corp. now intends to have the city's new
    > and long-delayed $7.8 million computer system fully operational by
    > March 1, 1997.
    > 
    > Uday Kumaraswami, vice president of Heritage Services for Digital,
    > assured the City Council last night his company is committed to working
    > with city officials to meet the deadline.
    
    5163.19>  The Worcester newspaper reported on Sat. March 1 that the 
              old Honeywell-Bull computer was switched off.
    
    Hooray, and congratulations for meeting the schedule.
    
    Now, for another quote from that 13 Nov article:
    
    > Councilor-at-Large S. Gary Rosen was particularly critical of Digital,
    > describing the project work as "gross incompetence.'
    >
    > He chided Digital officials for waiting this long before meeting with
    > the City Council, and he said many of the computer system's problems
    > should have been resolved a year ago.
    >
    > "Frankly, I thought we were going to get a magnificent presentation
    > from Digital tonight, but I haven't seen it,' Rosen said. "You
    > (Digital) can be proud of what you've done here. I bet you we will
    > still be discussing this problem come March 2.'
    
    Anybody take his bet?
    
    DougO

    Hm. Interesting comment on politics, and maybe business..
    
    I'd much rather have actions than presentations..
    
    ...tom

>>> Councilor-at-Large S. Gary Rosen was particularly critical of Digital,
>>> describing the project work as "gross incompetence.'

Could this be the source of the "unsatifactory" rating of Digital by the 
Better Business Bureau?

"Our file experience shows that this company has an unsatisfactory record 
with the Bureau. Specifically, our records show a pattern of no response to 
customer complaints brought to its attention by the Bureau."

It looks like this experience left a permanent stain.


							-Paul

    As far as I know, the BBB operates by forwarding complaints to the
    company and evaluating the response.  The quote seems to indicate that
    DIGITAL, several times, did not respond, or did not inform the BBB of
    their response, to customer complaints.  A complaint, or even multiple
    complaints, can not blackball a company unless there is no satisfactory
    response.
    
    Tony

    
    	Digital probably made the mistake of sending the responses to the
    	BBB via Exchange.
    
    	So it's possible that the Worcester project could be finished be-
    	fore those messages get through.  But it's hard to say if that's
    	a good thing or a bad thing.
    

    I read an article in the Worcester Telegram this morning about the
    system that Worcester is currently using.  Here is the article:
    
    For computer systems operators, adjusting to the year 2000 is a major
    problem.
    
    Many computer systems use two-digit year designations and interpret the
    year 2000 as 1900.  Gov. William F. Weld's administraiton is expecting
    to spend upwards of $20 million to make state computers recognize 2000
    as a valid date.
    
    But here at City Hall, Information Services Director Paul R. Covello is
    predicting no problem.
    
    "The industry is concerned about 2000, but Pentamation is making
    certain applications that can support it," he said, adding that it is
    too soon to know whether a cost will be involved with the adjustment.
    
    Pentamation Enterprises Inc. is the subcontractor for the financial
    component of the city's new computer system, which came online at the
    end of February.
    
    Overall, City Hall workers are finding the new $7.8 million system,
    whose implementation was plagued by numerous delays, much to their
    liking, Covello said.
    
    "We're in the process of acclimating ourselves to the new environment,"
    Covello said.  "So far, so good.  Of course, there are issues that
    we'll continue to work out, but nothing I'm aware of right now that is
    causing any great concerns.
    
    The plug was pulled on the city's former Honeywell Bull computer system
    Feb.24.  City officials plan to use the new system to print and issue
    fourth-quarter tax bills at the end of this month.
    
    Although it was supposed to be completely operational in July 1995,
    problems with the system's financial management component delayed full
    implementation.  In the meantime, the cost of using the Honeywell Bull
    system was about $36,000 a month.  Since May 1996, Digital Equipment
    Corp. had been picking up the tab.
    
    "Any change is always going to be a little scary from anyone's
    perspective," Covello said.  "Change is difficult for anyone to get
    accustomed to.  I haven't heard anything to the contrary right now. 
    It's still brand new from a lot of people's perspective."