Conference 7.286::digital

    This is amazing.
    
    Products we continue to have an acknowledged competitive advantage get
    given away for a song because management's field of vision is bordering
    on carpel tunnel syndrome.
    
    These guys would keep the crown jewels in a shoebox under the bed. And
    then flog them to a second hand merchant for beer money.
    
    
    Two alternative strategies:
    1. Get management who understand the broader game that being a computer
    vendor is
    2. Invest in Marketing, and get people right up the chain who
    understand what it takes.
    
    I now have to notify several accounts, some who have been through
    several of these ownership changes. And we wonder why account loyalty
    is being stretched.
    
    Can we get it straight , please. Good chip technology in, and of
    itself, does not solve a customer's problems. It is the total system
    that does that:
    1. Hardware
    2. Software
    3. Services
    4. Support
    It is not, and never will be, a 1 legged stool.
    
    If we looked at the behaviour of marketplace competitors we see a very
    definite difference:
    1. Digital - a hardware business who still feel uncomfortable with any
    notion that people buy things to enhance their business, not to 
    have the fastest thing on the block
    
    2. Hewlett Packard - desperately trying to build a services business
    after being down the hardware only track. Has started to push its
    distributed middleware, like distributed smalltalk etc, very hard.
    
    3. IBM - has realised there are two ways they can be successful,
    software and services. Purchased Lotus, invests heavily in the
    marketing of their middleware, particularly MQSERIES, which is inferior
    to DECmessageQ but which has a solid business focused plan for success.
    They are in the business, and they also are making money and growing
    the product set. There attendance at the Object Management Group also
    speaks of commitment.
    
    4. Sun - Java is it. Java will leverage there middleware offerings
    which will be offered as a bundled ad-on. Inferior to our products in
    all respects.
    
    5. Microsoft - the only hardware this company have really produced is a
    very stylish keyboard and mouse. They are trying to build a more
    complete service  model and have a consulting arm.
    
    
    There is now no evidence that, despite the "re-engineering",  we have 
    actually changed anything. We have a lot less people, but we obviously
    do not have any mechanism for understanding what the marketplace is
    really purchasing when it makes a buy decision. It's much more than a few
    boxes delivered to the doorstep. If we look back over the history of
    successful Digital products, we tend to say that the PDP-11 was a
    success or the PDP-10 etc. We tend to devalue the contribution that
    high quality, well differentiated software offerings have made to the
    success of those products and to Digital as a whole.
    
    This decision is a travesty, and underlies the lack of ability of those
    entrusted with management of our corporate assets to fully value the
    place of these products in the marketplace and the level of investment
    required to make them a success. History will record this company as 
    once being software asset rich but with a management that was not up to
    the task of stewardship required of such a complex and valuable
    resource. The solution is to get management who does understand, not to
    get rid of your competitive advantage.
    
    I have no doubt many of the engineers will be happy with this decision.
    They will go to a company who has a focus on software as a core
    competence. And Digital will lose their competence and again just be that
    little bit more inflexible when the customer asks for that
    differentiator that will make the differnce to their business. And our
    senior management will continue to scratch their heads in befuddlement
    when yet another obvious alpha win goes by-the-way to lesser hardware.
    
    It really is time for the Board of Directors to act to get management
    who understand.
    
    - John
    NSIS, Canberra, Australia
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    
    
    Have you ever considerd that our CEO, Bill Gates..I mean Bob Palmer, is
    pushing us more and more into HDWE so that we can marry into Microsofts
    software family?? ...They don't have the hdwe. We do. We soon WON'T have
    the software. They do. It's perfect....
    
    We are being assimilated. Resistance is futile...

    Tell me please, why would MS want to acquire Digital?  Sales of MS
    software on Digital products make such a small contribution to Mr.
    Gates that it's financially inconsequential.  I doubt that he would
    take any chance that disrupts his relationship with his friends at
    Intel anyway.

    I know the other argument is that Digital would bring "enterprise"
    level acceptance, but my crystal ball says that MS is rapidly gaining
    that acceptance without the likes of Digital.
    
    For many of the reasons written in .-1, I sometimes wish MS would take
    over.

    re: Note 5141.0 by BIGUN::BAKER
    
    This is utterly insane!
    
    Ken.....

    I find it all rather humourous ... I had the opportunity to talk with
    the DEC MessageQ PM at the recent Software Connectivity Symposium. 
    When asked as to what it would take to get the field to more
    proactively sell DEC MQ, my response was something like:
    
    "I'm not interested in selling my customers any product whose future is
    uncertain."
    
    Well now I won't have to worry about another software product and we
    can reduce the number of tracks offered at the next "Software
    Symposium".   We lack ANY credibility in the software field.  Wes
    Melling talked about how important and how good our software products
    are at the recent symposium.  Uh huh....
    
    8-(
    

    does this mean we stop 'selling' CICS on  Digital Unix ? (that's how I
    read the 'junking IBM's Transarc/Encina play'.)
    
    So, it looks like a pure HW play from here ?

    RE: 5141.0
    
    The company is pushing for customer loyalty. Without vendor loyalty to
    customers in the first place, how can true customer loyalty ever be
    built? This latest episode shows that the latest push is just 'customer
    loyalty talk'...
    
    -dlo
    

    There might be some logic behind it. Just as the RDB/Oracle deal has
    removed a competitive situation with a partner, this deal might make us
    a more attractive partner to ALL the ORB vendors out there. 
    
    I agree with .1: Our business can't be "just the hardware". 
    This is, however, a question of sales/marketing strategy, not of 
    product ownership. 
    
    We don't necessarily have to own every piece 
    of the solution, but we have to be able to deliver complete, tailored 
    solutions to our (large) customers. We can't do this on our own, with or
    without owning ObjectBroker. 
    
    Working with partners is not an option, it's a basic requirement for us.
    
    Klaus

>   does this mean we stop 'selling' CICS on  Digital Unix ? (that's how I
>   read the 'junking IBM's Transarc/Encina play'.)

No, it doesn't mean this. I can tell you with authority that that statement 
is false.

	Richard.

    re: .10
    
>we inquired and Corporate folks informed us 
>that "DECMessageQ" and "ObjectBroker" would be some of the last products that
>would ever be sold!
    
    Too true.
    
    We don't have many real software products left now.  We have two
    excellent O/S's: one that we seemed bent on destroying quickly
    (OpenVMS) and one that we seem to hope will die of neglect (Digital
    Unix).  It's now very hard to name a software offering that we regard
    as "crucial".  FX!32 is only one that comes to my mind.
    
    Why does it seem that the Digital Equipment Corporation of 2010 will
    probably look more like Digital Semiconductor than today's
    organization?
    
    :^(
    
    -- Russ

What kind of badge is Frank Lorenzo wearing nowadays?

    
    Lets say that, if they arnt sold out this time, its probably just around the
    corner and dont expect to be the first to know. Your customer will
    probably tell you before the great strategists responsible do. This is
    because these people have no concept of the implications of their
    actions.
    
    Think of it this way. 
    DCE, well that's just OSF stuff anayway 	- off to say Gradient
    RTR, only a few stock exchanges and nuclear reactors using that - off to EDS
    ACMS, too much OpenVMS heritage in that - Gone to the Bit Bucket
    
    So the loop continues:
    
        Digital drops a product --> customer questions committment
        -->Digital reassures-->lack of belief in committment
        -->customers hesitate on purchases--> Digital reassures
        --> Digital drops a product-->and so on
    
    
    The way this has been handled is also obscene.
    I had to find out about this sell-off via Unigram. I was not notified
    by any internal mechanisms so that I could constructively prepare my
    customers for the change. I also had the fact independently confirmed
    by the local BEA distributor BEFORE anyone inside the company would
    confirm it! I  now have written confirmation that it is occuring, from
    another internal group directly affected by the change.
    
    Is this any way to treat those loyal customers who have had to  endure
    enough rot from this company already?
    
    Oh, and if you think this is going to sell more alphas, think again.
    Due to a lack of support for some dependent software on Alpha/OpenVMS,
    the customer is starting to get "software availability shy". He's
    thinking a move to NT on multi processor Intel boxes (he can be
    guaranteed the software will be there) may be the most
    assured path to ensuring he has good software.
    
    I wonder how long customers like the Stock Exchanges will hang
    around on Digital kit when the software they depend on for their
    business, RTR, is suddenly in the hands of a software vendor who doesnt
    care on what platform it is sold. It will be interesting to see where
    OpenVMS and Digital UNIX and Alpha/NT end up on the BEAMessageQ and 
    BEA Objectbroker porting order over the next couple of years. If I were
    BEA, I suspect the SUN, Intel/NT  and HP ports would be higher on the
    list.
    
    
    - John 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    I was recently reading a book on negotiation with Chinese.
    I cannot remeber the title, but it had 36 strategies
    devised by Sun Tzu (spelling?).  One of them was "Loot
    a Burning Village".  DIGITAL very obviously falls into
    this category.  We are a totally dysfunctional company.

    We have minimal centralised financial control.  Companies
    are in the business of trying to make money, yet one
    would hardly believe that of DIGITAL.  For example, I
    believe that the expense and revenue figures for the
    products sold off are:

    Product		Expense		Revenue
    Object Broker	$11M		$1.5M
    DMQ			$4M		$6.5M

    Why had we not done something about Object Broker before?
    I believe that these figures may be higher (for example,
    DMQ's revenue may be around $8M), but because of our
    lousy control more accurate figures are not available.

    Then, when it comes to selling off the products we put a
    person that knows very little about the product to
    negotiate the deal with minimal contact with those affected.

    Imagine AP spending money to send a lot of people on a
    software symposium where most of the key products have been sold
    off. And I have presented to the local organization about the
    importance of selling software because they have higher margins
    with the Wells Fargo Bank as example and bang! the software just
    got sold off.
    
    This is a Greek comedy!
    
    /joeljosol

    re: .14
    
    RTR is not part of the BEA sale, unless you know something about it
    that I don't.
    
    Jon (RTR engineering)

    

Below is the fully approved copy for DIGITAL Press Release (CORP #97/553) 
announcing the middleware technology agreement with BEA Systems, Inc.

The copy has been fully approved by the executive, legal, marketing and 
business managers from both DIGITAL and BEA.

Scheduled for release on Tuesday, February 18, 1997, at 9:00 a.m.
via the PR Newswire. It will also be faxed by both companies to targeted
trade press at the same time.

*******************************************************************************

                          DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

        EDITORIAL CONTACT:
  
        Dick Calandrella
        Digital Equipment Corporation
        (508) 467-2261
        [email protected]

        Birdie Fenzel
        BEA Systems, Inc.
        (408) 542-4081
        [email protected]



             DIGITAL AND BEA FORM WORLDWIDE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIP

                TO DELIVER UNIVERSAL MIDDLEWARE INFRASTRUCTURE

           Companies Collaborate to Develop and Distribute Products


     MAYNARD, Mass. and SUNNYVALE, Calif., February 18, 1997 -- 

	Digital Equipment Corporation and BEA Systems, Inc. today extend their
long-standing relationship by announcing a major strategic technology and 
distribution partnership to simplify the development and deployment of 
distributed, mission-critical applications.

	This worldwide collaboration will provide the first industry-standard,  
cross-platform universal middleware infrastructure, and brings together the 
leading products in distributed transaction middleware, object technology, 
and message-oriented middleware. 

     	Under terms of the agreement,  DIGITAL and BEA will work together to 
deliver a broad, integrated middleware portfolio, created from their 
respective industry-leading software components.  BEA will acquire DIGITAL's  
ObjectBroker,  DECmessageQ, and related software technology,  making BEA the 
only  complete,  cross-platform provider of open middleware.  This 
transaction is pending U.S. Government approval.

      	BEA also will provide its market-leading BEA TUXEDO product on 
DIGITAL's OpenVMS platform in addition to the DIGITAL UNIX, and Windows NT 
platforms already supported by BEA.  All of DIGITAL's platforms will be 
first-tier ports for BEA's products. 

     	To further underscore the importance of this partnership, DIGITAL will 
assume an equity position in BEA, and will make a direct engineering 
development investment in ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ on DIGITAL Alpha 
platforms.  

     	DIGITAL also will continue to develop underlying distributed systems 
software, provide interoperability between the joint DIGITAL/BEA work and  

corresponding Microsoft Corporation technologies, and optimize these products 
on DIGITAL's  UNIX, OpenVMS, and Windows NT platforms.  In addition, both 
companies will expand marketing,  sales, and distribution of BEA TUXEDO, 
ObjectBroker, and DECmessageQ.  

     	This arrangement expands the multi-platform offering for these 
products, and ensures their continued individual availability and evolution 
for existing and future customers.

     	The fundamental technologies required for creating and integrating 
distributed business applications across the enterprise or over the Internet 
include transaction processing, object-based, and message-oriented solutions.  
Today, organizations developing and deploying mission-critical systems find 
that no single middleware technology addresses their complete enterprise 
application needs.  

	This extended partnership directly addresses these requirements for 
a simplified enterprise application environment by bringing BEA TUXEDO, 
ObjectBroker, and DECmessageQ together so that DIGITAL and BEA are now 
delivering the full range of required middleware functionality for solving 
complex business application needs.

      	"The partnership between DIGITAL and BEA indicates the strong, 
continuing commitment these two companies have to these technologies," said 
Alex Seale, project manager of Credit Risk Management System at Banque Paribas 
in London. "Their integrated middleware vision lays out a powerful direction 
for ObjectBroker, DECmessageQ, and BEATUXEDO -- one that we can take as a 
serious commitment to supporting my company's success."
 
     	"The partnership between BEA and DIGITAL comes at a critical time in 
the evolving marriage between legacy systems, the Internet, and the explosion 
of distributed object computing," said Christopher Stone, CEO, Object 
Management Group. "A robust object-based transaction model (BEA TUXEDO), 
coupled with DIGITAL's ObjectBroker (CORBA/IIOP) and DECmessageQ, sends a 
clear message to the financial services and transaction-oriented enterprises 
that they mean serious business. This was a smart, savvy move, and a 
partnership to bet the bank on."

      	"The technology collaboration between BEA and Digital will yield a 
portfolio of mission-critical middleware that takes full advantage of Network 
Computing Architecture (NCA)," said Mark Jarvis, vice president, Server 
Marketing, Oracle Corporation.  "DIGITAL and BEA are both long-time partners 
of Oracle's, and we look forward to working with both companies as they 
implement this strategy."

     	Don Harbert, vice president, UNIX Business Segment, Digital Equipment 
Corporation, said, "This extended partnership with BEA significantly 
strengthens our mutual commitment to supply our customers with the best 
multi-platform middleware products in the market today.  BEA now becomes 
our premier partner in developing multi-platform enterprise middleware 
for UNIX, OpenVMS, and other heterogeneous environments."

     	Bill Coleman, chairman and CEO of BEA Systems, Inc., said, "This 
announcement marks the further execution of our original mission - to provide 
an enterprise middleware infrastructure for distributed mission-critical 
applications. By combining the scalability and application management 
functionality of BEA TUXEDO with robust message queuing middleware and an
enterprise-class ORB (Object Request Broker),  we can provide our customers 
with a single, integrated product suite that addresses all of their middleware 
requirements.  We are pleased to be working closely with DIGITAL to make this 
solution available to the market."

     	BEA Systems, Inc. is a leading provider of cross-platform middleware 
solutions for enterprise applications.  BEA's products enable mission-critical, 
distributed applications that work seamlessly in client/server, Internet, and 
legacy environments.  BEA provides a transactional and messaging software 
platform based on BEA TUXEDO for developing and deploying these enterprise 
applications.  In addition to its product line, BEA provides complete solutions 
through its extensive partner network and broad range of professional 
services.  BEA is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, with offices around 
the globe.  Additional information on BEA is available on the Internet at 
http://www.beasys.com.

     	Digital Equipment Corporation is a world leader in open client/server 
solutions from personal computing to integrated worldwide information systems.  
DIGITAL's scalable Alpha and Intel platforms, storage, networking, software 
and services, together with industry-focused solutions from business partners, 
help organizations compete and win in todays global marketplace. Additional 
information on DIGITAL is available on the Internet at http://www.digital.com.

                                   -END-
CORP #97/553


Note To Editors --- DIGITAL, the DIGITAL logo, ObjectBroker, and DECmessageQ 
                    are trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation.

                    BEA and Enterprise Middleware Solutions are trademarks of 
                    BEA Systems, Inc.

                    TUXEDO is a registered trademark in the U.S. and other 
                    countries.

                    Windows and Windows NT are trademarks of Microsoft 
                    Corporation.

                    All other company and product names may be trademarks 
                    of the company with which they are associated.




                              (ADDENDUM PAGE)


INFORMATION ABOUT KEY PRODUCTS INVOLVED

BEA TUXEDO 
     BEA TUXEDO provides a robust middleware engine for developing and 
deploying business-critical client/server applications.  BEA TUXEDO handles 
not only distributed transaction processing, but also the application services 
necessary to build and run enterprise-wide applications.  It enables developers 
to create applications that span multiple hardware platforms, databases, and 
operating systems with full freedom to mix and match those platforms to best 
fit the application environment.  BEA TUXEDO is the market-share leader for 
distributed transaction middleware.

OBJECTBROKER
     DIGITAL's ObjectBroker is a proven, industry-leading, CORBA-conforming 
Object Request Broker (ORB), deployed widely today for business-critical 
distributed object-based applications.  With this partnership, BEA enters the 
growing distributed object systems market.  During 1997, BEA will provide 
integration between the mission-critical, high-performance deployment
characteristics of BEA TUXEDO and ObjectBroker's CORBA Distributed Object 
Development capabilities, creating the industry's first transaction-enabled 
object middleware.  The combination of BEA TUXEDO and ObjectBroker capabilities 
will allow customers to comfortably deploy mission-critical object-based 
applications.  BEA TUXEDO will integrate ObjectBroker to allow
objects and BEA TUXEDO services to interoperate, providing an evolutionary 
migration path to object technology.

DECMESSAGEQ
     DECmessageQ is the industrys highest performance, industrial-strength 
message-oriented middleware (MOM) solution.  Known for its leading position 
in the market, DECmessageQ provides a fast and reliable queuing system that 
connects disparate applications without invasion from or reliance upon other 
diverse applications.  This allows customers to incorporate existing 
applications into their enterprise middleware infrastructure.  DECmessageQ also 
provides a robust mechanism for seamlessly integrating legacy applications and 
data.  DECmessageQ, with its asynchronous connectivity capability, complements 
the BEA TUXEDO and ObjectBroker products as both a stand-alone product and an 
integrated addition to the product family. It is optimized for integrating 
distributed applications across a range of hardware platforms and operating 
systems, including UNIX, Windows NT, and OpenVMS.  During 1997, BEA will extend 
the integration between DECmessageQ to both BEA TUXEDO and ObjectBroker to 
ensure seamless access to both new and existing applications and systems.
    

    The press release was scheduled to go out at 9:00 but is not yet on our
    website. There is a set of customer slides that explains the deal and
    the ramifications. They should be available in the SBU internal website
    and VTX IR by midday. My opinion follows...
    

    This is a good deal for almost everyone. I know it looks like yet
    another software yard sale, but it isn't. And I don't think it will be
    that hard to convice the world of that.

    This is a strategic alliance. DIGITAL is not getting any cash for these
    products, rather it is taking an equity position with BEA. And the
    business, product management, and technical evangelist people (e.g.,
    me) are staying behind for now to keep the DIGITAL end of this business
    up to speed.

    Consider:

    Customers are going to get a better product because the sum of
    resources applied yearly by DIGITAL and BEA will be significantly
    greater than past, present, and projected budgets from DIGITAL. That
    means more features, more integrated technologies, and a market
    presence.  

    (I can't tell you how many times I've heard variations of, "Gee, your
    products are clearly superior but my boss has never seen an ad from you
    -- in contrast, we can't spit without hitting an ad for Iona's ORBIX or
    IBM's MQseries -- so how serious can you folks be about this stuff?)

    DIGITAL will sell the complete suite of BEA products, including TUXEDO
    and JOLT, and both companies will do joint marketing. TUXEDO will be
    ported to OpenVMS and all BEA products will be first-tier ports to
    DIGITAL platforms.

    BEA has a feet-on-the-street sales force, a consulting arm, and an SI
    business. They will all happily use and sell ObjectBroker, DMQ, and of
    course TUXEDO. Contrast this with the on-again-off-again nature of
    these aspects of the business at DIGITAL over the past five years. BEA
    also has a pretty close relationship with the big 6 (consulting firms).

    By having more of an arms-length relationship with these middleware
    products, DIGITAL has more maneuvering room and a freer hand. 

    (I can't tell you how many times we've been asked, "Well, can you make
    it run better/faster on our platforms?" We could never give the
    straight answer to that: "Yes, we could do that, but it would be a
    phenomenally stupid thing to do. Any move in that direction would be
    viewed as crippling the products non-DIGITAL platforms, and that's
    where most of our sales are.")

    But now that's all changed. Wouldn't it be nice if DIGITAL expended
    some effort in configuration tuning to get some monster CORBA
    invokes-per-second numbers, e.g., the way they did for the TPC-C
    benchmark with Oracle? I think the chances of that kind of synergy are
    a lot higher now than before. 

    And finally, the engineering group can now concentrate on designing and
    building product, rather than surviving as a software group in a
    hardware company.
    
    JP

    

>             <<< Note 5141.8 by RTOEU::KPLUSZYNSKI "Arrived..." >>>
>                       -< A slightly positive view ... >-
>....
>    I agree with .1: Our business can't be "just the hardware". 
>    This is, however, a question of sales/marketing strategy, not of 
>    product ownership. 
>    
>    We don't necessarily have to own every piece 
>    of the solution, but we have to be able to deliver complete, tailored 
>    solutions to our (large) customers. We can't do this on our own, with or
>    without owning ObjectBroker. 

You don't have to own all the pieces but you have to have some control
over them or enough leverage to put them to your use.  Selling a business
or product set and then depending on the largesse of those who buy them 
to help protect your interests seems naive.

This company seems to be dedicated to getting out of any business where
there is work to be done.  Instead, products are sacrificed on the altar of 
"protecting partnerships" in the apparent hope that Digital can ride 
on somebody else's coattails to market success.

"Middleware" - the heart and soul of client-server computing, eh?

- tom]

    
    The press release, e-mail questions&comments address, and a link to the
    BEA website, are now available in the "what's new" sections the
    ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ websites:
    
    http://www.digital.com/info/objectbroker
    http://www.digital.com/info/decmessageq
    
    re: .20, control
    
    Taking an equity position, as opposed to cash, was how DIGITAL
    addressed this concern. The contract with BEA covers three years, and
    DIGITAL is basically funding the implementation of our plans of record
    for these products. Partial ownership of BEA lets DIGITAL protect the
    interest of its cusomers beyond the contract time frame.
    
    JP

re .19 Surely the best possible outcome would have been to get at least some 
beer money as mention in .1 by John. 

Do you think the agreement would have been the same if Objectbroker and
DECmessageQ had not been bundled together?

Bob 

  Please review and keep these key points in mind about this partnership:

	* Digital takes a significant equity position in BEA Systems  
	
	* Digital invests in direct engineering at BEA, to ensure that Digital
  	  customer commitments continue to be met
  	  (note - per the agreement Digital & BEA jointly own these products 
 	  for the next 3 years; critical influencer for product directions, 
	  integration strategies, etc.)

	* BEA takes on product development for ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ
	
	* Digital continues to focus on developing underlying distributed
	  systems services, such as DCE, and on building best-in-class
  	  interoperability with Microsoft 

	* Both companies collaborate on joint middleware development, long
	  term product direction, joint marketing, promotion, and sales 
	  collaboration  

	* Digital will continue to make strategic investments in engineering
  	  middleware products including our DCE, ACMS, RTR, CICS and other 
  	  middleware components and the tools that support them. 

	* Digital platforms will be tier 1 ports for BEA Systems (i.e.
          ahead of or right along with Sun, HP, et al...not one step behind)

  DIGITAL'S STRATEGY

  Our strategy is to deliver the next-generation OTM-style middleware
  solution set to the marketplace, in development partnership with BEA.
  BEA's focus is on developing/integrating the OTM components.

  DIGITAL's focus will be on differentiation of this solution set
  on our platforms (e.g., 64-bit support, clustering, performance, etc.),
  and on integrating this UNIX-centric solution with the Microsoft
  ActiveServer equivalents, to support customers in heterogeneous
  environments.  

  DIGITAL's middleware strategy is differentiated by:

	* using open, industry leading TP & Database partners
	* optimized for our platforms
	* best-in-class Microsoft interoperability
	* leadership distributed computing services, as DCE 


  BEA compliments DIGITAL via:

	* OTM-oriented direction
	* complimentary product set with ours
	* strong marketing, sales, technical support having middleware 
	  expertise
	* leading marketshare & credibility in the open TP market 

  FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

  AMERICAS		EUROPE				ASIA-PACIFIC
  Philip Racicot @DAS	Peter van de Moosdijk @GEO 	David Foulcher @SNO
 			DTN:  821-4849
  PHONE: (508) 541-6253	PHONE: 41 227094111		PHONE: 61 49 34131

  WEB Sites:

  www.digital.com/info/decmessageq
  www.digital.com/info/objectbroker
 
  E-MAIL:

  [email protected]


  My personal 2 cents - this is a good move; Digital is in the software
  business with a software company

  Lin G. Schimel
  DmQ Marketing

  I will post the sales presentation also availabe on the SBU internal web home
  page and via VTX IR later today as follows:

	TLE::DECBEAf.ppt    (in V4.0 of powerpoint)

  (this is a DECnet default directory)

    
Here's the Q&A:
    
    
                           BEA/Digital Partnership
                             External Partylines
                              February 18, 1997


1. What is being announced today?

We are announcing the formation of a major strategic technology and
distribution partnership between BEA Systems, Inc. and Digital Equipment
Corporation that provides the first industry-standard, universal middleware
infrastructure for developing and deploying heterogeneous distributed
production applications.

2. What are the terms of the agreement?

Under this agreement, Digital will acquire an equity position in BEA, and will
make a direct engineering development investment in ObjectBroker and
DECmessageQ on Digital Alpha platforms. BEA will acquire the ObjectBroker and
DECmessageQ products. 

Both companies will collaborate not only on setting engineering direction, but
also on the marketing and sale of these products world wide. BEA will port BEA
TUXEDO to the OpenVMS platform in addition to the Digital UNIX and NT platforms
already supported, and Digital's Alpha platform will attain first-tier status
for all of BEA's products, which means Alpha will be among the first platforms
upon which these software products ship. 

3. Why did Digital partner with BEA? 

Digital, who has a long history with the TUXEDO product, has joined with BEA, 
because both companies share the same vision for the future of middleware. BEA
TUXEDO is the leading TP environment for open systems. The winning portfolio of
BEA TUXEDO, ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ will continue to meet the long term
needs of Digital customers who require a software development infrastructure on
Alpha and and other platforms in order to develop and deploy production
business applications. 

Furthermore, by working with BEA's world-wide marketing and sales organizations
around this leading portfolio of middleware products, these products will be
established as the industry-standard technologies in their respective areas.

4. Why did BEA partner with Digital? 

BEA will enjoy an expanded middleware portfolio which rounds out the product
offering to their customers.  As a result, BEA becomes the only full-service,
cross-platform provider of open middleware. It also better positions these
middleware products as the foundation for BEA to deliver on the vision shared
by both companies of a universal middleware architecture. Additionally, Digital
has committed to regard BEA as its premier heterogeneous middleware partner.

5. What is the value of this partnership to customers?

We see this partnership as an expansion of this product line, developed by two
leading companies, who share the goal of establishing these products as
industry standards.

This partnership forges a reinforced, joint commitment to furthering the
enhanced development of current products as individual offerings. It also
ensures their future evolution as an integrated portfolio delivering on the
strategic vision of an open, simplified, middleware architecture, based on
BEA TUXEDO, ObjectBroker, and DECmessageQ.

Developers will be able to create applications that span multiple platforms
with the freedom to mix and match technologies to fit the application
environment.

6. What is your strategic vision?

Digital and BEA's strategic vision is toward a universal middleware backbone
consisting of message-oriented, object request broker, and transaction
processing middleware that work together in an open, distributed environment.  

This architecture will simplify the way customers develop and deploy
distributed, mission-critical enterprise and Internet business solutions in the
future, and is consistent with the middleware direction described by leading
industry analysts. 

7. What is unique about the BEA/Digital strategy?

No other vendor is attempting to deliver a middleware vision across
heterogeneous platforms. BEA and Digital share a common vision for a universal
application development infrastructure that spans all platforms.  

8. How does this agreement affect Digital's relationships with Microsoft and
Oracle?

This agreement strengthens these relationships. Oracle has publicly stated its
support for the BEA/Digital partnership as being complementary to its NCA
direction. Digital plans to focus on developing technology that strengthens
Microsoft solutions across the enterprise, including interoperability, with
this direction.

9. Will products still be offered individually as well as part of the
integrated infrastructure? 

Yes. The companies will continue to provide these technologies as separate,
best-in-class products while also working toward creating an integrated
enterprise object middleware suite, one that customers are requesting.

10. Have other partners committed to this strategy?

Yes, indeed. BEA's and Digital's software partners and systems integration
partners have been briefed on the terms and significance of this agreement and
see it as a positive step forward for developing and deploying middleware
solutions to their customers based on these middleware technologies.

11. Who will sell the products?

BEA and Digital's direct sales forces and distributors will sell the products.

12. How will the product strategies of ObjectBroker, DECmessageQ, and BEA
TUXEDO change?

For the near term, the product strategies will not change.  BEA will continue
the development of these products based on the existing engineering plans of
ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ.  However, as is usually the case, the
engineering plans for these products will evolve over time through input from
our customers, the field, and as determined jointly by Digital and BEA.

13. Will Digital engineering for these products become part of BEA?

Partially. BEA is taking over the engineering of ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ,
while Digital will retain responsibility for the optimization of DECmessageQ
and ObjectBroker on Alpha platforms, for the development of Distributed COM for
Digital UNIX and OpenVMS, and for the DCE/ActiveX work presently underway with
The Open Group. 

14. Will Digital marketing and product management for these products become
part of BEA?

No. Since Digital will aggressively sell, service, and support these products,
Digital will retain the product management and marketing organization for these
products as it continues to focus on differentiating them along with BEA
TUXEDO, for the Alpha platform, while working with BEA to bring the vision to
reality.

15. How many people are involved in the move?

There are about 70 engineering personnel involved in the move.

16. How large is the equity position that Digital has acquired?

Digital policy says we are not permitted to disclose that figure.

17. Is all of Digital's middleware part of the deal?

No, only ObjectBroker, the ObjectBroker Desktop Connection, DECmessageQ,
and the DECmessageQ SAP/R3 wrapper are part of this deal.  

18. What does this mean for other Digital software products?

Other Digital software products such as ACMS, ACMSxp, RTR, our compilers and
our mail and messaging products will continue as Digital engineered products
providing solutions to Digital's installed base and other customers who need
them.

re: 23, 
>My personal 2 cents - this is a good move; Digital is in the software
>business with a software company

It would seem to me that DEC is liquidating it's software business assets.   
As a software engineer, they certainty liquidated my loyalty to DEC.

While on this subject of loyalty, there is no way a company can build 
and maintain customer loyalty without first having employee loyalty.

It is a good move for BEA.  The representatives of the acquiring company 
gave an inspiring description of the vast potential of the technology 
they were acquiring from Digital.   It was motivational, but I kept asking 
myself, "why doesn't Digital take advantage of this wide open market?" 

Is it a good move for Digital?  Who is Digital?  Does it improve employee
loyalty and morale?   It may be a good move for the stock holders in the 
short run, but by further divesting itself, I believe Digital continues to
become much weaker.

Sad Ex-DECie, Excited BEA Engineer.
Bruce.

"17. Is all of Digital's middleware part of the deal?

No, only ObjectBroker, the ObjectBroker Desktop Connection, DECmessageQ,
and the DECmessageQ SAP/R3 wrapper are part of this deal."

please do not communicate the SAP R/3 wrapper as part of the external party
line, there are still discussions underway with respect to this.


Bob

  

    re .-1
    
    The BEA web site says BEA is "receiving a worldwide perpetual
    license to one other product: SAP R/3 interface allows SAP
    applications to communicate to other applications with DMQ"
    
    Given that, it seems to make sense for us, I mean Digital,
    to include that in our partyline.
    
    Mark - (BEA bound)
    

re.27  Maybe you can enlightem me.

what exactly is a  "worldwide perpetual license"?

Bob (maker of the middleware layer IMS/MSG+ that makes the DMQ R/3
     wrapper work)

    
    I don't know why we're worried about DecMessage Q.  We tried to give our
    installed base of millions of users away to competitors when we decided
    to 'migrate' to Exchange.  Although this has infact fallen flat since
    customers are going to Lotus instead!
    
    
    Mike

    While attending the BEA session at last months sfwr. conn. symposium,
    we learned that BEA is a privately held company -- finiancials are not
    required to be published.  The current "alliance" announcement
    indicates that DEC has traded product/content for equity.
    
    However, DEC is a publicly held company.  Would this imply that the
    amount of equity now held in BEA must be in DEC's public
    recordings/reportings/SEC-filings?
    
    Randy
    
    
    My opinion???  Flush....
    

    re: .29
    
    DECmessageQ is part of a middleware category called message-oriented
    middleware.  It's very useful for application-to-application messages. 
    However, it is NOT mail, even though they two technologies use the
    same 'message'.  ;')
    
    Mike
    

    re 5141.15
    
    These expense and revenue numbers do not match what I know to be
    true. DmQ actually pulls in a lot more than 6.5M. I dont know if
    product revenue numbers are public, so I'll let someone else comment
    further if it makes sense to do so.
    
    ------------------
    
    Since there is significant grumbling in this note stream 
    from many who believe that software is IMPORTANT for DIGITAL, 
    I feel that it should be said that a spinoff of software could be the
    only thing that lets the software survive if the climate does not
    change. There is real value in DEC OS software, (VMS and UNIX) as
    well as networking expertise that most companies still dont have.

    Now, maybe software can no longer be marketed by a hardware vendor.
    This is not clear to me, since  divisions of large companies
    can function almost autonomously - so the real problem is an inability
    to structure the company so the hardware does not get in the way of
    the software.  Since it is apparently difficult, maybe upper management 
    just decided not to try.
    
    I probably am preaching to the choir here, since this has been
    said many times by many people in this notes conference and elsewhere.
    This is like XEROX giving away the fruits of its computing research. 
    If it didn't sell copiers then what good was it for, right?
    
    ------------------
    
    DIGITAL has been starving DmQ and milking us for revenue. We never
    fit the right plan or metrics and experts have tried to kill us many
    times. Whether this is by design or just happened, I can not say.
    We have had to be very creative to stay alive. So moving to a 
    software company should be a wonderful jolt for us.
    
    I expect we will slay giants soon. Good luck all.
    
    regards,
        Randy Skelding
        DmQ developer
    
    
    

    A question: Does this all mean a sudden death for RTR?
    
    Hung

    .33 Does this all mean a sudden death for RTR?
    
    The offical announcement metioned how RTR, ACMS family are unaffected 
    and will continue to be invested in.
    
    So I doubt if there will be any sudden death. 
    
    rgs              
    
    mick

    re: .34
    
    Rick, you're on to something.  There isn't enough listening going on. 
    However, there is a good amount of field input happening.  Sooner or later,
    they'll hear the message(s).  We'll see if it's soon enough.
    
    Having said that, I think the middleware sell-off is good for the people 
    affected.  I can't go into details, but the sell-off decision was made
    a long time ago, despite field input that it was going to have negative
    revenue impact to many of Digital's campaigns.  This impact has been
    far larger than just middleware revenue.
    
    Once the word got out that Digital was shopping the product segment, many 
    gifted people in the affected engineering groups left, many of the
    talent that remained developed a major league attitude (of frustration), 
    those of us in the field who knew of the plans stopped selling it to our 
    accounts, and the stagnation took on a life of it's own.
    
    I think some executive folk in the company knew that our middleware 
    offerings were strong, once hearing the inputs from us and some of the
    prospective ISV's.  However, some executives in the decision loop (who are 
    no longer with us) chose to remain unencumbered by the facts.  By then, 
    the horse was out of the barn and the product set became dangerous to sell.
    There were too few of us sales folk who knew how sell middleware, it was 
    (is) a complex sell, we knew the life cycle of this stuff (far longer than 
    hardware life cycles), and we didn't want to risk losing our and Digital's 
    credibility when a "bet your business" multiplatform product set got 
    dropped.  
    
    I choose to believe that the executive decisions to take an equity 
    position in BEA is an acknowledgement that the products are strong, only 
    slightly ahead of their time (to which GG agrees), and there's a bright 
    future for them.  As long as the product set stayed within Digital's walls,
    the future was less bright. 
    
    Keep up the good work in Motown!
    
    BT 

>>    While attending the BEA session at last months sfwr. conn. symposium,
>>    we learned that BEA is a privately held company -- finiancials are not
>>    required to be published.

BEA has apparently filed for an IPO.  See NYOSS1::MARKET_INVESTING note 1054.

						Brian

    This is really going to simplify a number of SI projects for me. Now I
    no longer have to be perceived as being biased toward our own products,
    since we aren't going to have any anymore!
    
    Seriously, it is the final sign that we are going out of the software
    business. There is no doubt in my mind that this company will be down
    to a single product (Alpha hardware) before very long. Then, we will
    sell off our remaining manufacturing capability, and finally, the Alpha
    technology itself. The cycle will be complete.
    
    I'm sorry to see it happen to the company I've worked many years for,
    but it doesn't surprise me; the signs have been there for a long time.
    All in all, I think the wind-down strategy has helped many qualified
    technical people transition to new jobs, will slowly weeding out the
    deadwood and management overhead that has killed this company. When a
    product gets sold off, the new owner get free reign to keep the people
    provide the direct contribution, like the designers and engineers,
    while the management and support types are quickly let go. We could
    never manage to accomplish that within the original company, so it's
    left up to the companies who buy parts of us to clean up.
    
    I spend every day trying to deal with the fact that my competitors in
    the SI market are able to undercut me, out-market me, and out-manuever
    me. I have six levels of management to pay for, they have two. I have
    no market visibility (advertising, tradeshow presence, alliances) while
    they announce new programs constantly. I have spools of red tape to tie
    myself in, they operate on a level of efficiency that I can only marvel
    at. In the end, we win some in spite of ourselves, but it leaves a bad
    taste in my mouth when I know what "might have been" ...
    
    Geoff 

>    This is a strategic alliance. DIGITAL is not getting any cash for these
>    products, rather it is taking an equity position with BEA. And the
>    business, product management, and technical evangelist people (e.g.,
>    me) are staying behind for now to keep the DIGITAL end of this business
>    up to speed.

    This is a reason why I think DIGITAL is dysfunctional:

	1.  We sell off something we can do well: Engineering.
	2.  We retain something we do poorly: Marketing.

    DIGITAL needs evangelists as much as the world needs people like Bakker!
    Were you the evangelist that ensured DIGITAL 'invested' $11M for returns
    of $1.5M (see note .15).

    If anyone doubts we make a fiasco of marketing consider the issue of
    branding the company.  We used to be known as DEC, indeed this was
    embedded in our product names (for example, DMQ).  We decided this
    should become Digital.  Now we found we are required to become
    DIGITAL to resolve a conflict with telephones (it use to be watches
    if you remember).  The comapny's logo is still 'digital'.

re .38

	This is a good note to read and re-read.  Under the current strategy,
we are certainly headed to be at most a division of another company.  I now
question whether Alpha has a future.  It would seem to me if HP/Intel can
pulloff the P7/merced chip, we are done.  I see NT as the future of computing,
I think it is killing Unix even faster than was expected.  That being the case,
HP will have the leg up on everyone else in terms of marketable hardware.

	Just driving around the GMA and seeing all the former glory represented
by closed DEC buildings is a major reality check of where we were and where
we are headed.

30 years from now Digital will be (along with all the other defunct mini-
computer makers) classic MBA school fodder...  I just wish it weren't so,
I really like working here (sigh).

Ugh!
Brad.

re: .40

> Under the current strategy,
>we are certainly headed to be at most a division of another company.  I now
>question whether Alpha has a future.

Only now?  On the other hand, if StrongARM has a bright enough future it may
keep Alpha alive.

>  It would seem to me if HP/Intel can
>pulloff the P7/merced chip, we are done.

Isn't that the big IF?  If it requires recompiles of all your favorite
software then the game is wide open again.  I thought that was part of the
whole raison d'etre for Alpha.

>  I see NT as the future of computing,
>I think it is killing Unix even faster than was expected.

Is it just taking NEW market share away from UNIX or are we starting to see
an actual decline in UNIX shipments.  Out on the Internet it seems like a lot
of UNIX bigots (and Mac bigots) will only accept a Microsoft solution when
it's crammed into their cold dead fingers.

>30 years from now Digital will be (along with all the other defunct mini-
>computer makers) classic MBA school fodder...

Maybe sooner.

- paul

        It sounds more and more like the ten year DEC disassembly process was
    finalized six or seven years back and is right on schedule.  Who's
    really making the money from the salvage operation?

>       <<< Note 5141.39 by OZROCK::MCGINTY "Defenestration of Prague" >>>
>                                  -< RE: .19 >-
>
>    This is a reason why I think DIGITAL is dysfunctional:
>
>	1.  We sell off something we can do well: Engineering.
>	2.  We retain something we do poorly: Marketing.

What an amazingly succinct and accurate presentation of the problem.
It's consistent with the "coattails" analogy that I've used.
Digital is heading towards a state of "leveraging" rather than "doing." 
The company is working hard to become a middleman, being satisfied with
skimming partnership efforts rather than creating solid, unique, profitable
value and maintaining our own destiny.

- tom]

    	What I "heard" from someone in one of the groups that got sold to
    BEA was that they didn't *want* anything but the engineering people.
    	I remember several years ago, someone in upper management saying
    that we had too many products, and our sales force was confused and
    didn't know how to sell them. At the time, it never occured to me that
    the solution to that problem was to reduce the number of products down
    to almost zero!

Re: .39
    
>    This is a reason why I think DIGITAL is dysfunctional:
>
>	1.  We sell off something we can do well: Engineering.
>	2.  We retain something we do poorly: Marketing.
>
>    DIGITAL needs evangelists as much as the world needs people like Bakker!
>    Were you the evangelist that ensured DIGITAL 'invested' $11M for returns
>    of $1.5M (see note .15).

Mr. McGinty, do we really need to insult each other? 

First, in the 18 years I've been with this company I've never been
convinced that we could accurately measure software revenue, so I don't
find those numbers at all believable.

Second, in the past two years, the business model for middleware has
changed numerous times -- from software product, to SI adjunct, back to
software product (remember the Connectivity Software Business Unit?),
and then to alpha box leverager. Each change of product direction
required a lot of work by engineering management and senior technical
talent, as well as by product management and marketing. How far can you
get if you change direction at random every six months?

If you think that going through these change-of-direction exercises was
the idea of engineering or marketing, guess again. Your finger-pointing
is as silly as blaming the sales force for the lack of revenue (as I see
it, the sales cycle for these products is about 18 months, while the
company calls in an airstrike on the sales force about every 9-12 months,
which undoubtedly affects their concentration).

I don't know what you think a technical evangelist does, but setting
investment levels for software products is not among my duties. In fact,
I work for engineering, and I work with marketing, product management,
and sales in a variety of ways to get the middleware message out to
customers.

And DIGITAL, in its infinite wisdom, made me a Consulting Engineer quite
a while ago (long before I started working with middleware)...even
though I'm a technical writer by trade. I may not be a real engineer,
but I can recognize a locomotive when I see one.

So I hope I've managed to justify my existence to your satisfaction. I'm
sure that if either of us had been in charge for the past five years,
things would be different. But they aren't, so can we get back to
trying to save the company?

JP

I am reminded of a saying of a long departed Deccie:
"You can polish a turd all you want; but in the end,
 all you have is a shined up piece of shit."

The message I get from all this is: "All yea in software:
head for the hills, noone in software is safe.  
If you don't  want to write software for a hardware 
group, find a job in a software company."

My .02.  Pardon my french.

Mark

    
    Re: .44, Steve DiPirro,

>    	What I "heard" from someone in one of the groups that got sold to
>    BEA was that they didn't *want* anything but the engineering people.

    Not true, and I've confirmed this with two people who were actually
    party to the negotiations. BEA wanted the whole business, lock, stock
    and barrel, specifically including product management, "product
    promotion people," etc. After all, this is how these acquisitions are
    normally done.
    
    DIGITAL's management, in its desire to shore up the perception of full
    strategic partnership, held back some people to continue to work on the
    DIGITAL end of things.
    
    re: .45, Mark Kowalski
    
    >The message I get from all this is: "All yea in software: head for the
    >hills, noone in software is safe.   If you don't  want to write
    >software for a hardware  group, find a job in a software company."
    
    I've never argued, nor do I believe, that this is a good omen for
    software folks at DIGITAL, and I consider myself one of them. But I
    honestly believe that this is a Good Thing for the products and their
    customers. I even give DIGITAL management some credit for letting these
    products go while they were still viable.
    
    To sum up, I don't have to like it...I just have to deal with it.
    
    JP

I can't believe some of the comments in this stream .... as i stated
in the bmq notes conference we don't have a partnership!!! For some 
trival stake in bea we have setup an adversary and given them our
genitals to hold...and we are paying them to do it!!!!  and right ...
we are tier 1 in bea's eye because WE do the engineering!!!

>>Partially. BEA is taking over the engineering of ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ,
>>while Digital will retain responsibility for the optimization of DECmessageQ
>>and ObjectBroker on Alpha platforms

on the day of the announcement BEA approached the bmq accounts that i am 
aware of in this region with a view to cutting digital out!!!!!!

you are fools if you view BEA as anything other than the adversary they 
are starting show themselves as!!!!!

    re: .48
    
>on the day of the announcement BEA approached the bmq accounts that i am 
>aware of in this region with a view to cutting digital out!!!!!!

Assuming you meant DECmessageQ by dmq, what are they going to cut Digital
out of?  If you mean they're actively persuing opportunities with
DECmessageQ, how is cutting Digital out?  It sounds like good
marketing and sales to me.

>you are fools if you view BEA as anything other than the adversary they 
>are starting show themselves as!!!!!

How can they be adversaries if Digital has given up on the software
business?  We gave up consulting and we're rapidly giving up all non-OS
software.  Digital has done little to nothing with these products, and if
you think engineering and marketing multi-platform products in Digital is
anything but neigh impossible, then you need to try it.  While I never
thought I'd leave Digital this way, it certainly gives these products a
chance to capture market share they could never have done within the
confines of "the new Digital".

-tl

  >>How can they be adversaries if Digital has given up on the software
  >>business? 
  
  We may have given up on developing software but not necessarily reselling
  it asa part of a solution sale.  I believe that the selling arrangement 
  with BEA is similar to Forte - you need to register the prospect with BEA
  as being a Digital sale then both sales forces get credit and *should* 
  work together.  With no MOU in place, BEA would not have to share the
  sale.  Don't know what happened in .48 - hopefully a early
  misunderatanding.
  
  Todd's right though that the products now have a chance - good luck to you
  and all on both teams.       
  
-ian

>Mr. McGinty, do we really need to insult each other? 

    I was not aware we were insulting each other.  I was merely
    pointing out that an envangelist was a position that I
    considered this company did not need.

    The Concise Oxford Dictionary:
    evenagelist n. writer of one of the four Gospels; preacher
    of the gospel; layman doing missionary work.

> I was not aware we were insulting each other.  I was merely
> pointing out that an envangelist was a position that I
> considered this company did not need.

  Evangelism, as the term is commonly accepted in this industry,
  is *EXACTLY* what this company has needed for about a decade
  or more.

  If we'd had some evangelists, there might be a bit more Alpha
  market penetration. Or VMS might be the desktop standard rather
  than QDOS. Or there might have been a VAX in every desktop
  instead of a [68K|x86].

  I'm sure others can think of many examples where we failed to
  evangelize a nascent market, and others stepped in instead.

                                   Atlant

    For what it's worth -- UNIGRAM X (again) and Infoworld check in with
    opinions.

UG628-03 DEC GETS A CHUNK OF BEA UNDER MIDDLEWARE DEAL
         
BEA Systems Inc told us its next acquisition would be 
"strategic," and so it turned out to be (UX No 627). As expected, 
Digital Equipment Corp last week announced it will sell key 
distributed object and messaging technologies to the 1995 
Sunnyvale, California-based middleware start-up and take a 
undisclosed stake in the company, the size of which it says could 
become "significant" over time. Tim Yeaton, director of strategic 
planning for DEC's Unix business segment says the opportunity BEA 
offered to advance DEC's OTM object transaction middleware 
strategy was more important than the cash it will receive for the 
products, which are the ObjectBroker request broker, asynchronous 
DECmessageQ technology and some related software including DEC 
Desktop Connection which links ActiveX clients to ObjectBroker. 
Terms of the deal mean DEC becomes a BEA VAR and will resell Unix 
and NT versions of the BEA Tuxedo OLTP monitor, as well as an 
OpenVMS version which BEA will supply to it, plus the object and 
messaging products which BEA will re-brand under its own name 
once the deal completes. DEC will pay royalties to BEA and says 
it will continue to develop and enhance the messaging and object 
products for its Alpha RISC system customers. Around a quarter of 
DEC's Unix middleware development group is being offered work by 
BEA under the deal, some 75 engineers, which is separate to DEC's 
Unix clustering, operating and system software development team. 
Employees at DEC's Nashua, New Hampshire-based ObjectBroker and 
Hartford, Connecticut-based DECmessageQ teams will be re-located 
in a new BEA facility the company will establish no further than 
20 miles from each town. ObjectBroker is closely aligned with 
Microsoft Corp's Distributed COM object model, and is now also 
compatible with Object Management Group's Corba 2.0 distributed 
object mechanism. DEC's Microsoft and Corba development teams are 
separate and the Maynarder will retain its Redmond technologists 
to continue and extend interoperability between its products and 
Microsoft's ActiveX object model, Falcon messaging and other 
middleware technologies. DEC says it will continue to provide its 
ACMS Transaction Processing monitor - now based on IBM/Transarc 
Encina - to OpenVMS users, as well the Transarc's CICS/6000 
implementation for DEC Unix and VISystems' CICS-compatible VIS/TP 
monitor. 

Iceberg

BEA says it will Corba-enable Tuxedo using ObjectBroker during 
1997, claiming the integration will enable object and Tuxedo TP 
services to interoperate using IIOP. The integrated product is 
code-named Iceberg. ObjectBroker products can be upgraded to 
Iceberg. BEA will also integrate DECmessageQ with Tuxedo and 
ObjectBroker, which will provide asynchronous, store and forward 
inter-application message queuing to both environments. 
Interoperability will be developed between all three products 
before integrated suites are offered. BEA will continue to offer 
the products as discreet technologies as well as part of an 
integrated environment and also plans to introduce a graphical 
management interface in March that will enable administrators to 
manage BEA middleware from a variety of system and network 
management environments including HP OpenView, IBM NetView and 
the Tivoili Management Environment. Closure of the deal awaits US 
government approval.
    
Subject:	InfoWorld on the deal...

  Digital sells off middleware wares to Bea

  By Rebecca Sykes
  InfoWorld Electric

  Posted at 2:40 PM PT, Feb 18, 1997
  Bea Systems will acquire two of Digital Equipment's middleware
  products, Digital announced Tuesday.

  Pending U.S. government approval, Bea will purchase Digital's
  ObjectBroker CORBA-compliant software and DECmessageQ,
  Digital's message queuing middleware, Digital officials said.

  Bea will port its Tuxedo middleware engine to Digital's OpenVMS
  platform, officials said. Tuxedo already runs on Digital's Unix
  and Microsoft's Windows NT, officials said. In addition,
  Digital will assume an equity position in Bea and will work
  with Bea to get ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ running on Digital
  Alpha platforms, officials said.

  The move is good for both parties, analysts said.

  Bea is getting solid technology and expanding its presence to
  include large accounts dealing with legacy environments, said
  Richard Buchanan, program director for the Meta Group, in
  Peterborough, N.H.

  For Digital, selling the technology makes sense given its
  recent strategy shift to focus on the Internet as the company
  battles back from a shaky period, Buchanan said.

  Another analyst agreed that the deal fits Digital's strategy.

  "They have very good technology there, but they have not made
  it a focus," instead turning to hardware, especially Alpha,
  said Melinda Ballou, senior research analyst with the Meta
  Group, in Waltham, Mass.

  But in some ways, the sale of the technology sends the industry
  a mixed message about Digital.

  "It demonstrates that there is an R&D and technology function
  within Digital that is capable and relevant to this new world
  of computing, even if they can't market it," Buchanan said.
  "The downside [is] it makes the unfortunate point that Digital
  can't market its way out of a wet paper bag."

  Bea Systems Inc., in Sunnyvale, Calif., is at
  http://www.beasys.com/. Digital Equipment Corp., in Maynard,
  Mass., is at (508) 493-5111 or http://www.digital.com/.

  Rebecca Sykes is a Boston-based correspondent for the IDG News
  Service, an InfoWorld affiliate.

 Please direct your comments to InfoWorld Electric News Editor Dana 
Gardner.

               Copyright ) 1997 InfoWorld Publishing Company

     META Flash OCSS and ADS 2/18/97

     Open Computing & Server Strategies
     and
     Application Delivery Strategies

     Digital Middleware to Become Tuxedoware

     With hopes of ensuring its place near the top of the middleware
     heap through the year 2000, BEA Systems Inc. announced today
     (jointly with Digital Equipment Corp.) it will merge Digital's
     messaging and CORBA middleware (DECmessageQ [DMQ] and Digital
     ObjectBroker [DOB]) with its Tuxedo transaction processing
     middleware. Although the deal must await SEC approval (not
     expected to be a problem), BEA will control three
     enterprise-strength middleware products when the dust settles and
     be positioned as one of three dominant middleware vendors, along
     with IBM and Microsoft (with Oracle still conspicuously absent).
     By 1998/99, BEA will be able to challenge IBM and Microsoft
     across their entire lines of transactional, messaging, and
     distributed object middleware.

     This is an excellent partnership for most Digital and BEA users,
     with an important exception being ACMSxp users. There is every
     indication this deal relegates ACMSxp to legacy status. The
     spin-off to BEA means Digital's middleware customers will gain an
     organization dedicated solely to middleware. On the other side of
     the deal, BEA customers will get more robust messaging middleware
     components and the reassurance that BEA's CORBA plans are on
     track. This will also have a significant impact on the general
     enterprise middleware market as BEA evolves from its leading role
     on the transaction processing stage to the larger enterprise
     middleware framework arena.

     As part of the deal, BEA will acquire DMQ and DOB, both of which
     are best-of-breed products that currently have limited market
     share because of Digital's lack of marketing and DEC-centric
     focus. Seventy-five Digital developers, who will remain located
     in Nashua, NH, and Hartford, CT, will join BEA. BEA will acquire
     Digital's ObjectBroker Desktop Connection (ActiveX
     interoperability) and will be granted a source license to
     Digital's SAP R/3-to-DMQ interface component. Digital will also
     take an equity position of undisclosed size in BEA's proposed IPO
     (filed with the SEC three weeks ago). Other financial terms were
     not disclosed.

     With this acquisition, BEA will broaden its already substantial
     customer base (1,000+) with access to 600+ DMQ customers and
     numerous high-profile DOB customers (e.g., Wells Fargo, Swiss
     PTT). Digital will continue to service and support existing
     customers and will do the same for future customers who buy BEA
     middleware through Digital. BEA and Digital will jointly market
     and sell BEA middleware.

     To benefit from the technically strong but unrelated products,
     BEA must move to provide basic interoperability immediately and
     full integration as quickly as possible. BEA's road map calls for
     interoperability among DMQ, DOB, and Tuxedo by mid-1997, with
     full integration by 1Q98. Integration between Tuxedo and DMQ
     should be relatively straightforward, because Tuxedo is already
     designed to work on top of a message queuing transport layer
     (i.e., Tuxedo/Q). Integration between Tuxedo and DOB and between
     DMQ and DOB will be more complex. First, integration between DMQ
     and DOB, while already specified in an RFP recently submitted to
     the Object Management Group, is dependent on the standards
     approval process. Second, integration between Tuxedo and DOB
     requires that Tuxedo conform to the CORBA Object Transaction
     Service specification. Given the scope of integration required,
     we do not expect complete, production-quality integration of
     these products until 2H98.

     Besides integrating its own products, BEA must also integrate its
     products with Oracle's CORBA-based Network Computing Architecture
     (NCA). We expect BEA will become the linchpin between NCA and
     Netscape's CORBA-based ONE architecture, establishing a coherent
     CORBA-based alternative to Microsoft's DCOM-based middleware. In
     addition to integrating its newly acquired products into the
     CORBA camp, BEA must give equal importance to integrating with,
     on the low end, Microsoft's middleware, especially Transaction
     Server (MTS), and on the high end, IBM's MQSeries. Visual Basic
     (VB) programmers must be able to take their VB services that have
     run out of steam on MTS and drop them unmodified into the BEA
     framework. Digital's connections with Microsoft may be helpful
     here, and organizations that have already bought into MQ as a
     messaging backbone must still be able to layer BEA's
     transactional and distributed object layers onto it. Finally, BEA
     must fill a significant hole in its middleware product line in
     the area of remote data access (e.g., ODBC, OLE-DB).

     Although the middleware market is large and growing rapidly
     ($350M+ in 1997, 40% CAGR), no middleware company has yet been a
     big winner in this space (e.g., MOM and ORB vendors). Key to
     winning in this market is widespread ISV adoption. BEA is off to
     a good start with its integration of Tuxedo into PeopleSoft
     Version 6, but it must attract many more ISVs to be successful. A
     smaller, but still significant, success factor is widespread SI
     adoption. While BEA has strong relationships with the SI arms of
     Sun, HP, Tandem, Unisys, and Digital, it needs to strengthen its
     ties with the Big Six SIs (building on its strong relationship
     with Andersen). The combination of a broad and integrated product
     set, an IPO cash infusion, and a demand market for scalable
     middleware (driven by Net-based applications) should make BEA the
     breakout middleware company by 2000.

     Bottom Line: The transfer of Digital's messaging and object
     middleware to BEA is a good move all around. We expect to see BEA
     at the top of the middleware heap, with Microsoft and IBM, by
     2000.

    We have a working relationship with Microsoft, right? So, this months
    Byte syas that Microsoft is going to concentrate on making their
    BackOffice stuff more flexible, versatile and one of those things is
    Microsoft Message Queue. Seems to me that we'd not be smart if we
    didn't ditch the non-open, non-standard DECmesageQ until it was too
    late. After all, we're just riding the train these days and we don't
    own the engine.
    rtt

    Well, not that it's any of my business, but the dictionary quote is
    wonderfully dry and free of connotation. Earlier you mentioned the
    evangelist and also mentioned "Bakker" - I presume that's Jim, you were
    referring to?
    That gives your "evangelist" reference quite a spin, don't you think?
    It does for me at least.
    
    r
    

    re: .56
    
    Yes, Jim Bakker is out of jail.  And he has reportedly repented of both
    his sinful behaviour and his errant theology.
    
    Whether such an example is appropriate for DIGITAL is left as an
    exercise to the reader...

    We used to have an evangelist; Dan Kalikow. He was laid off.
    
    Laurie.

	He was one fine man.... and loved that beanie with the propeller on it
that he wore! :-)


Glen

    DmQ is no more "non-open" and "non-standard" than any other messaging
    product.  First, I'm not aware of any meaningful standard for MOMs. 
    Secondly, it runs on more platforms than most of its competitors, and
    more platforms than its current substantial competitors.  MS's Falcon
    is still not out in the market yet, and how many platforms other than
    NT it runs on will depend on Level 8's delivering queueing engines for
    non-MS platforms, as I understand it.
    
    Unfortunately the one platform the DmQ does not run directly on is MVS,
    although the queue adapter and soon-to-be-coming client library for MVS
    solve the problem more completely than the LU6.2 Port server product. 
    This was balanced by MQSeries Level 1 on Unix being substandard, giving
    IBM a weak multiplatform position (Level 2 fixes that, but has been
    slow in coming on other than HP-UX, NT, and AIX platforms).
    
    DmQ could have been the defacto standard a long time ago, if it had
    been given the appropriate marketing $. 

    Is it true that a DMQ system must have one VMS box somewhere in the
    net? I gave my customer the doc set, without having time to read it all
    myself, and that was his conclusion. Since he has all Unix
    systems a VMS box is not available, or wanted.

    RE need a vms system on the net.
    
    No, there was a restriction on previous versions where if you wanted
    to use message broadcasting then you did need one vms system to be 
    the broadcast server. Broadcasting is now available on unix, nt
    variants.
    
    The only other case for needing a vms box was with the Lu6.2 gateway
    to IBM....
    
    hope this helps,
    
    Bob

    Er, um, broadcasting on non-VMS platforms is not available yet to
    customers, but will be with the 4.0 release due out this spring
    sometime.  Ditto for global naming services (which is available on VMS
    but also requires DECdns, which I think runs only on VAXen?).  As long
    as they don't need broadcasting or global naming services, then they
    don't need VMS now.  With 4.0, they won't need VMS even for these.
    
    My customer has >7,000 DmQ licenses, all on (non-Digital) Unix
    platforms.  There is a single Alpha VMS system being used by one
    application, not for broadcasting but for an LU6.2 gateway to a 
    mainframe back end, and that is being replaced by an HP-UX box running
    the DmQ MQSeries Connection product (queue message bridge).   Soon it
    will be all DmQ on Unix (HP-UX, Solaris, NCR Unix), and not a single
    DEC platform in sight (I'm expecting lightning to strike me any minute
    now).
    
    There are some API functions available on VMS only, but nothing of
    critical importance.  Some are because of features Unix doesn't provide
    (e.g., no AST-equivalents).
         

    

        Attached is the text of a letter that can be used with customers
        to help clarify the strategies for the ACMS/ACMSxp/RTR products 
        in light of the recent announcement of the Digital/BEA relationship.
  
        If you need a copy of this on Digital letterhead with Wes's
        signature contact one of the following:
	
		-Bob Slone  DTN226-5941   [email protected]
		-Larry Vifquain DTN226-5930  [email protected]


	lbv
	///
 


       (addressed to customer)


        Thank you for your continued interest in Digital's transaction
        processing middleware products. These products are a very
        important part of our strategy to support customer needs for
        client-server applications across heterogeneous platforms.

	There are at least two separate trends evolving for transaction
 	processing middleware over the next five years. Due to the breadth
        of Digital's product offerings and its large, diverse customer base
        Digital needs to address both trends.

	One trend centers around open standards defined by industry standards
        bodies and open standards such as POSIX, CORBA and DCE. UNIX is the
        reference O/S and examples of popular middleware include TUXEDO and
        CORBA compliant object brokers. Digital, as recently announced, is
        partnering with BEA to evolve Object Transaction Monitor (OTM)
        solutions for this market.

	The second trend tends to be more speed-oriented and pragmatic.
        It looks  to emerging defacto standards such as JAVA, ActiveX, DCOM
        and Microsoft Transaction Server (MTS). Digital believes that the
        ACMSxp product with its unique high-level Structured Transaction
        Definition Language (STDL) is ideal for this market. Digital also
        believes that STDL provides the easiest and lowest risk approach
        to building portable, compatible applications today for the
        emerging MTS OTM defacto standard.

	To meet the needs of this second market, Digital is investing
        in ACMSxp and STDL to provide state-of-the-art features for support
        of the Internet, object oriented applications and workflow. Early
        in 1997  V3.0 of ACMSxp is being shipped for OpenVMS, Digital UNIX and
        Windows NT. Plans for later in 1997 include delivery of a Software
        Developers Kit for use of STDL with MTS and integration of STDL with
        Microsoft Internet Information Server (IIS) and Oracle's NCA.
        Plans are to deliver ACMSxp for non-Digital Unix platforms as well. 
  
	Finally, for transactional systems which must survive the most
	severe catastrophes, Digital invests in and aggressively markets
        the Reliable Transaction Router (RTR). RTR is available today across
        all Digital platforms as well as IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, HP/UX and
        multi-vendor WNT platforms.

	I hope this clarifies Digital's strategies and product investments 
	which are designed to help you safely and economically evolve your
        business critical applications to take advantage of the
	technology.

	If you have follow-on questions that need to be handled directly
        by the	product development organization, my e-mail address is
        [email protected].

	
   	Sincerely,



	Wes Melling
	Vice President, OpenVMS Systems Group
 

	
    

    There's a one page article (pg. 34) in this week's Inter@ctive Week
    (3/3) on BEA...talks about their products, customers...titled "BEA
    Bases Livelihood on Acquisitions". There is a timeline on BEA Systems
    Milestones since the Company was founded in Jan. 1995.
    It may be on their web site www.interactive-week.com/intweek...I didnt
    check. 

    From March 3, 1997 issue of PC WEEK, page 117.
    
     BMC Manages More Middleware 
     by Paula Musich
    
    "BMC Software Inc. stretched its middleware management capabilities late
    last month with new Patrol Knowledge Modules for managing Microsoft
    Corp.'s Exchange and IBM's MQSeries messaging middleware offerings.
    .
    .
    .
    BMC already provides Patrol Knowledge Modules for Digital Equipment
    Corp.'s Tuxedo, DCE, and Lotus Development Corp.'s Notes.
    .
    .
    ."
    
    I have been away at customer sites the past few days.  Did I miss some
    follow-on to the BEA/DIGITAL announcement?  ;>)
    
    

Actually, Tuxedo was spun out to Novell, who subsequently
sold it to BEA. 

So, it was originally a Digital product, and it is now a BEA
product, but the path from hither to yon was not so simple...

Kevin

RE: .66
>So, it was originally a Digital product, and it is now a BEA
>product, but the path from hither to yon was not so simple...

Tuxedo was never owned by Digital.

It was originally owned by AT&T as part of USL which was sold to Novell. 
Novell then sold most of USL to SCO (?) except Tuxedo.  Novell eventually
sold Tuxedo to BEA.

Several years ago Digital did own a source license to Tuxedo so that we
could port and sell it on Ultrix and OSF/1.  Digital eventually gave up
the source license and let Novell port and sell it on Digital UNIX.

					- Alan

posted with permission... the BusinessBus bounces back :-)



From:  Rob Starkey
Subject:  BusinessBus for SAP R/3 Quick Start sales package announcement

I am delighted to announce the availability of the QuickStart sales package
for "BusinessBus for SAP R/3". It consists of:

1. QuickStart Presentation
	Overview of QuickStart sales package. Internal use only.
2. Brochure
	Sales brochure
3. Product Overview
	Sales document, executive level product description
4. Product Overview Presentation
	Customer presentation covering Product Overview (15 minutes)
5. Technical Overview
	Sales document, technical level product description
6. Technical Overview Presentation
	Customer presentation covering Technical Overview (60 minutes)
7. Price List
	Price list, discount schedules and pricing tiers
8. Software Product Description (SPD)
	Available soon
9. Sample Proposal
	Available soon
10. White papers
	Technical papers on this product and related technologies

The majority of these materials are available now at the following location:

http://www.ozy.dec.com/businessbus

I recommend that, for Customers, you print the brochure in colour. Volume 
copies of the brochure and Product Overview will be available from OGO in
early April.

The SPD and Sample Proposal are not yet complete and part numbers are still
to be allocated for the software licences. These will be announced through
the home page as they become available. To ensure that you receive
notifications of updates to the package materials, please register through
the home page.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone within NSIS and
other business units for their assistance in bringing this valuable NSIS
service offering to market in such a short time.

I wish you all, productive and successful selling for Q3, Q4, and beyond.
Let me know how, where, and when we can help.

Thanks again for your support.

Regards,

Rob Starkey.

    Ughh, whatsa BusinessBus?
    
    Randy
    
    

other than pointing you to the web page and saying rtfm (or is it now rtfwp :-))

The BusinessBus is an off the shelf application integration solution. 
In this case for SAP R/3. 

Based on a value add layer on DECmessageQ called MSG+ combined with an
Integration Engine and SAP R/3 Generic Wrappers. 

Differences - not vapourware, no hype, it works, easy to use, robust SAP R/3
              integration.

The quickstart package mentioned in .68 is a complete set of material to help
deliver and GROW what's left of our middleware and enterprise application
expertise in DIGITAL.

hope this helps,

Bob 
  

    re .70
    
    I am a member of Digital's SAP Technology Center in Walldorf/Germany
    and in charge of R/3 advanced development. SAP is working hard on new
    integration means via messaging and CORBA.
    
    I will be back next Monday. Give me a ring under (49) 171 335 4876 or
    mail to [email protected].
    
    Hung

    Urgently need to know who is supporting DMQ for the next 12 months. 
    The assumption is BEA, but not sure.
    
    THanks
    
    

    re.70
    Hi Bob, so your re-incarnated CSDA???
    
    steve

re: .73

  ...from the planning I have been involved in:

	- There shouldn't be any significant change in the way DmQ 
	  Engineering is part of the Digital's ENET when we transition
	  to BEA.  This should continue unchanged for 1-2 months until
	  we cut over to BEA's internal network.

	- We will be looking into leaving behind PAMSRC to continue as
	  the host for NOTEs, netkits and other related materials.  It
	  is unclear how much direct access will have to this node.
	  Most likely the CSC will take over as moderators for the 
	  conference.

	- Digital CSC will continue to provide level I and II customer 
	  support with DmQ Engineering providing support to CSC.

	- As a result of not being directly on the ENET I suspect that any
	  DmQ patches will have to be funneled through the CSC.  

	- BEA will be spinning up their own support organization to service
	  the customers that they sell to.

	- Digital and BEA are business partners and as a result Digital
	  will continue to have an influence on DmQ's product directions.

	- The netkit availability I expect to continue, although I am not
	  sure if the License PAKs will switch to being a royalty style
	  like Motif.

	- There will still be a number Digital people tasked with handling
	  Digital/BEA product issues like IPMTs.

Hopefully the rest of the open issues will addressed in the next couple of
months.


Marty Michelsen
DmQ Project Mgr

re .48:
    
    >on the day of the announcement BEA approached the bmq accounts that i am
    >aware of in this region with a view to cutting digital out!!!!!!
    
    The same thing just happened at my large-volume DmQ customer in the US,
    obviously without coordinating with the Digital account team as is
    supposed to happen.
    
    This is a partnership?

    
    Re: .72, Ricciardi
    
    Here's what I've been told:
    
    As part of this strategic alliance, Digitals Multivendor Customer
    Services (MCS) is working with BEA Systems, Inc. to ensure that
    existing customers continue to receive the high level of service that
    MCS currently provides. Right-to-new-version, telephone support, and
    media and documentation update services will continue to be available
    from MCS for both the Objectbroker and DECmessageQ product sets. 
    
    
    
    For DECmessageQ, MCS will continue to offer these services to our
    existing customer base, as well as to new customers who purchase the
    BEA product and MCS service through Digital. For Objectbroker, MCS and
    BEA have agreed to transfer responsibility for providing service to
    BEA. Customers with current MCS service agreements for Objectbroker
    will have the option of renewing their service directly with BEA during
    a migration period. Existing customers will receive specific
    information regarding the details of this migration plan from their
    territory MCS organizations.
    
    

    everyone, thank you. I'm less effective without notes....  I hope it
    never goes away

John, what are the reasons behind Digital MCS keeping DECmessageQ support
and not Objectbroker?

Surely a customer will look on this as a transition and wonder why stay with
Digital?


re 'strategic alliance' now where have I heard that before? :-)

Can anyone give positive examples of where BEA has helped us so far? Still looks
like a one-way-deal to me.


Bob

    
    Bob,
    
    I could speculate about why there is a difference in support models,
    but instead let me point you at the source of the information. Pat
    Baker says she doesn't mind having her name/number posted here and
    she can be reached at DTN 276-8502.
    
    As far as whether BEA has helped us so far, it's still a bit early. We
    have noticed a definite increase in the interest that is expressed
    in ObjectBroker within the object community (newsgroups, etc.).
    
    But the bottom line (and I may be repeating my previous responses here)
    is that this is good news for the products' engineering team, the
    customers, and of course for BEA. It _could_ be good news for DIGITAL
    but not unless we execute a strategy that differentiates our platforms
    when they are used to run these products. Plans are being developed to
    do exactly that.
    
    But I wouldn't expect any other response to that news than a loud,
    "Seeing is believing." That's my attitude anyway, so watch this space.
    
    JP

We are paying someone to take these products and it is
good for everyone except DIGITAL .... and if we work hard
it _MIGHT_ be good for us. sounds good to me!!!

>
>Hewlett Packard will announce today an agreement which allows HP to support
>the
>BEA middleware suite - TUXEDO, ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ.  We want to
>alert
>our world-wide field of this news and explain the positive effect this has on
>Digital's partnership with BEA Systems and our OpenOTM software strategy.
>

'positive effect' :-) i would like to see that!!!

the sbu pays BEA to take a couple of our products.  they give away others that
they don't own and against the explicit instruction of the owners.  the sbu
commits to sell an increased number of licences (although sales and marketing
have been the main inhibiters to market dominance by the products) against a
'partner' (who when given our customer list gave their sales force and
ultimatum at get into/takeover all of our existing accounts) and the HP's of
the world.... first microsoft, now our ex-middleware .... when are we giving
HP alpha???? and what for ... a 'partnership' and some equity position that is
so small it is too embarrassing to make public????

as summarised by .-1 this deal a win for everyone expect digital but if we 
work REALLY hard we might not lose too much .... heh i keep feeling win-win 

and before another arrogant person gives me another little homily like
>if you think engineering and marketing multi-platform products in Digital is
>anything but neigh impossible, then you need to try it.
that is what i do!!! well at least did until the sbu gave some of our 
products away 

From:	BOSEPM::RIO "Paulette Rio, ObjectBroker Mrktng, 381-1650  01-Apr-1997 1424"  1-APR-1997 14:25:51.72
To:	@OBB_TEAM,@OBB_INT,@TERRITORIES
CC:	RIO
Subj:	Flash - HP announcement regarding BEA middleware

PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY.  

This "flash" will also be disseminated world-wide via Readers Choice.


FROM: 	Paulette Rio 		Lin Schimel		Peter Powell
	ObjectBroker Mrktng	DECmessageQ Mrktng	TUXEDO Mrktng
	138844		
	@ZKO			@ZKO			@ZKO
	DTN 381-1650		DTN 381-1659		DTN 381-1615
	FAX 381-2550    	same			same
	

SUBJ: Response to HP Announcement: HP to Resell BEA Middleware Suite
      
Tuesday, April 1, 1997

Hewlett Packard will announce today an agreement which allows HP to support the
BEA middleware suite - TUXEDO, ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ.  We want to alert
our world-wide field of this news and explain the positive effect this has on
Digital's partnership with BEA Systems and our OpenOTM software strategy.

Here are the facts as we understand them at this time:

1. HP will be providing TUXEDO, DECmessageQ and ObjectBroker as part of its
company's Systems Integration business - not as discrete products.  This will
be purely a service business for HP.

2. HP will eventually stop selling Encina and CICS in favor of TUXEDO, but does
not plan to discontinue selling ORBplus, their own CORBA-compliant ORB.
 
What does this mean to Digital?

We see this as a very positive step forward for OpenOTM and our strategic
partnership with BEA Systems to promote and sell these products widely and to
deliver on the OpenOTM strategy for enterprise and Internet application
opportunities.

Here are a few messages that clarify this announcement.

1. With the BEA/Digital agreement, both companies set out to ensure that the
combination of ObjectBroker, DECmessageQ, and TUXEDO would be widely accepted
as a de facto standards for OpenOTM, and HP is in fact endorsing this 
direction. 

2. Joint selling opportunities are beginning to multiply between BEA and
Digital reps in accounts where TUXEDO customers also want to now seriously
consider DECmessageQ and/or ObjectBroker as a complementary technology to
TUXEDO.  For Q4 alone, we have over 24 named opportunities being pursued by a
Digital and BEA sales team, with more to come.

3. HP must be feeling exposure in their TUXEDO accounts with their end-of-life
32-bit UNIX systems as compared with Digital UNIX 64-bit.  

4. Digital Services has vast expertise in these products and is best prepared
to deliver these products to customers on all brands of UNIX. 

5. This agreement muddies HP's ORB strategy, since ObjectBroker competes
directly with HP's ORBplus, and is a much more mature CORBA ORB.  ORBplus has
been on the market for less than a year, while ObjectBroker has been on the
market since 1991.  Customers today do not really want to deal with two ORBs.
If a customer wants the integrated BEA middleware solution, it does not leave
much room for ORBplus in that account.

If you have further questions regarding this announcement, feel free to
contact the names listed at the top of this agreement, or the Digital product
managers as follows:

ObjectBroker - 	Dan Gilfix
		[email protected]

DECmessageQ  -	Elery Willett
		[email protected]

TUXEDO	     -  Charlie Parker
		[email protected]

    Man, if these people had been working for Jimmy Carter during the
    hostage crisis, the spin would have made it sound like Jimmy had
    personally arranged for Iran to provide all-expense paid vacations
    to the "guests" at the Embassy ... 
    
    Geoff

    
       <<< Note 5141.81 by ENQUE::PARODI "John H. Parodi DTN 381-1640" >>>
                        -< the full memo quoted in .-1 >-

From:	BOSEPM::RIO "Paulette Rio, ObjectBroker Mrktng, 381-1650  01-Apr-1997 1424"  1-APR-1997 14:25:51.72
To:	@OBB_TEAM,@OBB_INT,@TERRITORIES
CC:	RIO
Subj:	Flash - HP announcement regarding BEA middleware

PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY.  

This "flash" will also be disseminated world-wide via Readers Choice.


FROM: 	Paulette Rio 		Lin Schimel		Peter Powell
	ObjectBroker Mrktng	DECmessageQ Mrktng	TUXEDO Mrktng
	138844		
	@ZKO			@ZKO			@ZKO
	DTN 381-1650		DTN 381-1659		DTN 381-1615
	FAX 381-2550    	same			same
	

SUBJ: Response to HP Announcement: HP to Resell BEA Middleware Suite
      
Tuesday, April 1, 1997

Hewlett Packard will announce today an agreement which allows HP to support the
BEA middleware suite - TUXEDO, ObjectBroker and DECmessageQ.  We want to alert
our world-wide field of this news and explain the positive effect this has on
Digital's partnership with BEA Systems and our OpenOTM software strategy.

Here are the facts as we understand them at this time:

1. HP will be providing TUXEDO, DECmessageQ and ObjectBroker as part of its
company's Systems Integration business - not as discrete products.  This will
be purely a service business for HP.

2. HP will eventually stop selling Encina and CICS in favor of TUXEDO, but does
not plan to discontinue selling ORBplus, their own CORBA-compliant ORB.
 
What does this mean to Digital?

We see this as a very positive step forward for OpenOTM and our strategic
partnership with BEA Systems to promote and sell these products widely and to
deliver on the OpenOTM strategy for enterprise and Internet application
opportunities.

Here are a few messages that clarify this announcement.

1. With the BEA/Digital agreement, both companies set out to ensure that the
combination of ObjectBroker, DECmessageQ, and TUXEDO would be widely accepted
as a de facto standards for OpenOTM, and HP is in fact endorsing this 
direction. 

2. Joint selling opportunities are beginning to multiply between BEA and
Digital reps in accounts where TUXEDO customers also want to now seriously
consider DECmessageQ and/or ObjectBroker as a complementary technology to
TUXEDO.  For Q4 alone, we have over 24 named opportunities being pursued by a
Digital and BEA sales team, with more to come.

3. HP must be feeling exposure in their TUXEDO accounts with their end-of-life
32-bit UNIX systems as compared with Digital UNIX 64-bit.  

4. Digital Services has vast expertise in these products and is best prepared
to deliver these products to customers on all brands of UNIX. 

5. This agreement muddies HP's ORB strategy, since ObjectBroker competes
directly with HP's ORBplus, and is a much more mature CORBA ORB.  ORBplus has
been on the market for less than a year, while ObjectBroker has been on the
market since 1991.  Customers today do not really want to deal with two ORBs.
If a customer wants the integrated BEA middleware solution, it does not leave
much room for ORBplus in that account.

If you have further questions regarding this announcement, feel free to
contact the names listed at the top of this agreement, or the Digital product
managers as follows:

ObjectBroker - 	Dan Gilfix
		[email protected]

DECmessageQ  -	Ellery Willett
		[email protected]

TUXEDO	     -  Charlie Parker
		[email protected]

How does the deal with BEA effect DIGITAL's relationship with Forte?

There must be overlap with the OO and transactional capabilities 
provided by Forte compared to the Open Object Transaction Middlware 
(Open OTM)?

Bob 

    Digital *used* to sponsor Rahal and dropped it, due to cost cutting. 
    We had both car and driver at an Autofact, complete with an invitation
    only luncheon.  Had my customers there, got pictures, autographs, etc.
    
    It was one of the biggest hits of the show.  Biggest problem with the 
    luncheon was getting my customers past the mob of all the other reps and 
    their customers who *weren't* confirmed for lunch with Bobby (that
    wanted admission).  Somewhat chaotic, but an indicator that (at least mfg)
    executives like this stuff.
    
    BT

            C O M P U T E R   I N D U S T R Y   D A I L Y

                           April 23, 1997

    =====================================================================
     Timely Insights and Analyses of Today's Information Technology News
    =====================================================================

    CORBA Appears to Be on the Way Out

       Developers are increasingly turning to open component
       architectures like COM and JavaBeans in place of CORBA, according
       to Forrester Research, Inc.  The long wait for CORBA capabilities
       is forcing frustrated programmers to more basic architectures.
       Only 14% of Fortune 1,000 companies use CORBA, in spite of the
       architecture being around for the last decade.  Senior analyst
       Donald DePalma said, "Elitist models like CORBA, DSOM, and
       OpenDoc will soon find themselves off the map altogether unless
       they shift to meet the demands of the common developer."

    =====================================================================
    Daily research and analysis by the editors at Computer Economics,
    Inc.  Copyright 1997.
    COMPUTER INDUSTRY DAILY, 5841 Edison Place, Carlsbad, CA 92008
    Phone: (619) 438-8100, Fax (619) 929-1178

    E-mail: [email protected]
    WWW: http://www.computereconomics.com

    

I've seen a contrary view of that.

In a French magazine, there was an article concerning how Netscape believed
that HTTP had run it's course and that they needed a more modern technology.
The protocol selected was IIOP, the CORBA protocol. 

I've not seen that reported anywhere else but if true then CORBA could
be popular before too long.

M

    
    Hmmm. I would say that Forrester piece is neither timely nor
    insightful. First, the author is seriously confused about where and how
    these pieces fit together, e.g., DSOM is not an object model at all --
    it is IBM's implementation of CORBA. And OpenDOC, which began life as
    an Apple component architecture and was adopted as the CORBA component
    model architecture, died a horrible death a few weeks ago when IBM
    announced it was no longer of interest (thus OpenDOC is unlikely to do
    any shifting, as it is busy decomposing).
    
    JavaBeans is the Java component model, while COM is the Microsoft
    object model that underlies OLE and ActiveX. 
    
    CORBA has experienced furious growth ever since Netscape announced its
    support for the CORBA wire protocol (IIOP) last August. That was also
    the event which prompted Microsoft to hand over its ActiveX and DCOM
    specs to the Open Group, in order to appear as open and non-proprietary
    as CORBA/IIOP.
    
    In any case, CORBA's reason for being is addressing the problem of
    distributed object systems on heterogeneous platforms. In contrast,
    Jave/RMI (remote method invocation) is for homogeneous Java
    environments, and COM/DCOM is for Microsoft platforms. Java/RMI and
    COM/DCOM do address the heterogeneous platform question, but this is
    clearly not the primary focus of either.
    
    And of course, Java/RMI or COM/DCOM might very well be the right choice
    for a customer. But both of these pitches tend toward the "just replace
    all your other stuff with ours, and you won't have any interoperability
    problems." Completely valid, but often not a very attractive
    proposition.
    
    JP
    
    P.S., some of you may remember Don DePalma as one of the technical
    writers for Rdb V1.0, who left with Jim Starkey to form Groton Data
    Systems.
    
    

    Paul Kimball, a former coworker now independent consultant, mentioned
    that CORBA demand is growing among his customers- he's taught three
    one-week courses the past month and has another scheduled next week.
    His impression is that the surge is because the CORBA products now in 
    the market finally seem to almost work.
    
    DougO