Conference 35.181::insurance

    
    Several people have contacted me to ask how C.L.U.E. as mentioned
    in .0, can be purchased, etc.  C.L.U.E. is not a product and can
    not be pruchased.  It is a kernal system developed for DECworld
    and in no way represents a finished, sellable product.  Hope this
    clears that issue up...
    
    JL
    

    The issue is not whether CLUE can be delivered today (although more
    than one rep with an account which can use a solution like that
    probably considers it to be a less than trivial issue), the issue
    is how do we put together demos for trade shows and seminars which
    customers can actually buy rather than walking away frustrated.
    For DECworld '99 our European allies call this WYSIWYCB (What You
    See Is What You Can Buy) and are making a major effort to make it
    happen.  Smoke and mirrors make a good show, but they don't help
    the certs or revenue line.  I know Michael Flitterman has some ideas
    on this issue.  We need to support the effort.  We owe it to our
    customers, we owe it to our shareholders, we owe it to our sales
    repas and we owe it to ourselves.

    And by '99 we'll probably have it done -- sorry meant DECworld '88.
    Hope the typo doesn't throw anyone too badly.
    
    Regards,
    
    Lee Katz, U.S. Programs

    
    A new demo has been installed at the A.C.T.  It is called Autorisk
    and it is an AI based auto underwriting assistant.  Very similar
    to C.L.U.E. mentioned in .0.  I think it's pretty snappy and again
    shows off the VAXstation, multi-windows, etc.  It is written in
    the DEC Foxglove environment.  Not for sale...
    
    JL
    

    Another unsaleable demo!?!  Showing off capabilities is fine. 
    What do we do when a customer wants to buy it?
    
    We have to stop building demos in unsaleable environments.
    
    Lee Katz
    U.S. Programs 

    I absolutely agree with Lee. Why are we demonstrating something
    we can't sell? Why are we developing it?
    
    Maybe I'm missing something. 
    
    McMystified

    I would like to also echo these sentiments.  Here in the field it
    is difficult to get a customer excited over something we can't sell
    them.  Our prospects continue to ask what the "it" is that we have.
     I think it is great that we can develop such products, but please,
    let "it" be something I can get certs for.  

    I think it's actually a matter of balance.  We need demonstrations and
    proof sources that show we are "Pushing the Envelope" out to new areas.
    These will typically come from FISG and the SIC.  This will show our
    ability to lead the industry.  
    
    One the other side of the equation we need high quality solutions to
    today's business problems regardless of which channel supplies them. 
    Maybe we need to try to make a list of packages our clients are
    using/buying?  It seems to me I have seen something like this. 
    Lee, do you have any insight?
                                      
    We seem to be out of balance, but I think we need both types of
    demonstrations and consulting in the ACT.

    

    
    The purpose of this particular note was to be a news update of ACT
    demos.  I think it would have been better to start a "reaction to
    ACT demos" note.
    
    However, this demo, like CLUE, is slick, shows well, was completely
    packaged with excellent documentation and fit in well with our existing
    demo scenario.  Why should we turn it down?  As with CLUE, we stress
    that it shows off what is possible with the VAXstation technology
    and multiple windowing, etc.  Customers can chose the AI shell of
    their preference and write their own just like it.
    
    Jim
    

    Hope I'm not stirring things up again, but to support what Jim Lawrence
    was doing by letting everyone know of the existence...
    
    The purpose of making expert system demos is NOT to demonstrate
    a saleable product, but to demonstrate the ability to represent
    knowledge for this particular paradigm or domain.
  	
    Inherent in any application which is to be used in an advisory
    capacity, it is most always not feasible to develop a generic product
    for the industry cut at the problem. Even two companies with exactly
    the same products, customers, and problems do not approach analysis
    or problem solution the same way. To this end, we have found time
    and again that proving the ABILITY to represent the knowledge and
    solve the problem demonstrates the competetive edge these customers
    are looking for.
    
    We are marketing differentiation, not pat solutions. And I certainly
    hope that we never all start thinking alike.
    
    Don    
    

    I seem to have stirred up a bit of a hornets' nest.  Jim, sorry
    to have stepped on your note, but controversy seems to be what notes
    files and computer conferencing are all about.
    
    Please understand that my reaction was not so much to an unsaleable
    demo -- I certainly understand that in an area as esoteric as AI
    and Commercial Life Underwriting Applications that a good deal of
    tailoring needs to go into the final product -- (although it would
    be nice to have a saleable demo) but to the development of demos
    in unsaleable environments.  That seems to me to be going one step
    too far.
    
    When not only the demo is unsaleable, but the tools used to create
    the demo are also unsaleable then marketing and engineering have
    done sales no favor.  Now that it is done, let's use it for what
    it is worth; however, I would ask that in future we at the very
    least use the tools we are selling for customers to develop their
    own AI applications to develop our AI demos.  If that's not efficient
    then we have a problem with our product set that needs to be fixed,
    but I do not believe that to be the case.
    
    Thanks for your patience Jim, I hope you've heard the message repeated
    by some folks out there on the front lines whom we have to help
    in order for all of us to succeed.
    
    Regards,
    
    Lee Katz
    U.S. Programs

    
    No offense taken.  We should all be able to speak our minds.  Try
    and bear in mind that DEC doesn't have much in the way of stock
    software solutions for the Insurance industry.  So to populate our
    ACT DECworld, we go for whatever we come across that looks good
    and this demo looks great.  It really shows off the VAXstation
    technology well.
    
    Regards, Jim
    

    But when a customer tries to buy it -- or something like it and
    we say not only can't you get this, but you can't get the tools
    we built it with either -- how would you like this other tool set?
    What do you think the customer's reaction might be?
    
    L

	Are there any demos that use VTX/VALU, DECvoice, or EDI?

	Carl