Conference 35.181::insurance

    I have talked with our Sales Support and Simpact regarding this
    product. At this time, Simpact is looking for beta sites.  Since
    this is a low level interface, our technical folks say the customer
    will have to do some programming, and in some cases, a lot of
    programming to make it work.  The people at Simpact are very DEC
    knowledgeable and they do have some local reps.

    Be VERY CAREFUL about attempting to penetrate an account with this sort
    of strategy.  Use of this device (assuming it works, and SIMPACT has a
    good rep, so it probably does) completely precludes the use of any of
    DIGITAL's network products.  A machine sold using this will be purely
    and simply a point solution.
    
    Companies that are "totally committed to SNA and TRN" are also totally
    committed to not competing in the international market (where networks
    are increasingly based on open standards); thus, these folks are simply
    not ready for the "real world".  All IBM shops are tough nuts to crack;
    but they can be cracked.  I urge EXTREME caution in surrendering the
    network to IBM and promoting point solutions to "get in the door".  You
    can expend termendous effort, and be back out the door before you know
    it.
    
    Steve
    

    "Surrendering the network"?????????
                            
    Do you know how much damage has been done in some major accounts
    by going head on to replace their choice of SNA network or Token
    Ring standard (choices made, usually, long before we ever showed
    our faces in the building)? It isn't "surrendering the network"!
    But it is insulting them, and, as a consequence, gets us thrown
    out before we can even find out if there *is* a back door.
                            
    Let's get real here. This is not a religious issue. It is a practical
    sales issue. And my notice of this product is an early warning that
    there may be a very useful product coming available for our use.
    Let's wait until the facts are in before we man the battlements,
    of see surrender looming.           
                             
    And let's remember that most US companies currently care not a whit
    about international markets; so their dumb, backward standard is
    just fine by them.       
                             
    Maybe - just maybe - a device such as this card would diffuse major
    objections SNA/Token Ring companies have to even allowing a DECnet  
    departmental solution to get in the door. And, as I understand it,
    the MicroVAX in which the card resides can also be a member of a
    DECnet network. So the card would not completely preclude the use
    of DEC network products.
    
    Please do not have the attitude about our customers that they are
    heathens who need to be converted. I work with two accounts where
    we had people attempt to perform an SNA or Token Ring exorcism.
    We are still overcoming their resentment of our arrogance.
    
    Ed

    The real issue is often that both DECnet and SNA/TR networks already
    exist in large accounts and the inability to move between the
    environments hurts DEC by giving the Novell, 3 COM and other ethernet
    vendors who can provide either interface a strong advantage over
    DEC.
    
    Before bringing in this type of solution though you should evaluate
    using Trans SDLC products which allow a DECnet to be used as a backbone
    to connect Token Rings.  This isn't a perfect solution but it does
    leverage DEC solutions into the account.
    

re: 74.3

>    Do you know how much damage has been done in some major accounts
>    by going head on to replace their choice of SNA network or Token
>    Ring standard (choices made, usually, long before we ever showed
>    our faces in the building)? 

Yes, I am well aware of what an improper approach on this subject can do.

>    It isn't "surrendering the network"!

Unfortunately, it is, in most cases.

>   And let's remember that most US companies currently care not a whit
>   about international markets; so their dumb, backward standard is
>   just fine by them.

Their CEO's may feel differently.  Ask them and see.  I also did not say that
their standard was dumb and backward, just that it would hurt them in the not
too distant future.  One of the fastest growing insurance markets is the Pacific
Rim, where the networking climate is significantly different than it is the U.S..

>   And, as I understand it,
>   the MicroVAX in which the card resides can also be a member of a
>   DECnet network. So the card would not completely preclude the use
>   of DEC network products.

I would submit that, while it is technically possible to achieve this, there is
very little benefit in the absence of significant amounts of applications
programming, to develop "gateway" software.  This may not be an issue on a 
case-by-case basis, however, my concern stands.

>   Please do not have the attitude about our customers that they are
>   heathens who need to be converted.

I don't.  I do, however, believe that many of our customers are not aware of the
significant benefits that DECnet/OSI offers, particularly from the perspective
of the network as a competitive weapon.  This is not a discussion that is 
productive with IS folks, where it quickly degenerates into SNA bashing and 
religious conflict.  A reasonable business person is looking for the best
solution.  In many cases, DIGITAL can offer a cost-effective dual-network
strategy that provides the best solution, protecting the installed SNA base
while enabling the flexibility the customer requires to achieve their business
goals.  My own experiences bear this out.

Steve

    The issue quite often comes down to network management and
    interoperability in an environment where the TRN exists. (Where
    DON'T they exist?? Please, lead me to 'em!!) We say we support
    standards, even DEFACTO ones i.e. SNA, TCP, unshielded twisted pair
    (it's soon to be an "official" standard, I know...)  Media
    independence????? Really?? Do I think DECnet(/OSI) is BETTER than
    SNA, TCP, etc.?? What do you think? I have to try not to let my
    technical awareness of the superiority of DEC network products get
    in the way of what's best for business - ours AND the customers.
    Good grief,,,we even make a MAP product! Did we loose the whole
    enchilada by capitulating to TWP or SNA?? As a DNT sales consultant,
    I deal with this issue CONSTANTLY!! Let's get real and not forget
    our history - we may not have the chance to repeat it. BTW - I have
    NO love for TRN - in case anyone was wondering!

    While I still hope for improved interconnectivity and maybe
    interoperability, I have spoken with the Simpact folks and their
    product is not the answer. This may have been clear in earlier replies
    but if so, I missed it. The simpact TRN 5200 product is designed
    to allow Qbus VAX to attach to TRN - that VAX would not also have
    a DELQUA, etc. No "gateway" here.

re: -.1

That is the point I was attempting to make.  This type of device is useful when
a point solution is required,  and extensive custom development is not an 
obstacle.  It does not represent a means for "seamless integration" of the
DIGITAL network environment with the IBM network environment.

Steve

    I am told by a CSS person that CSS has been charged by NAC with
    developing DEC's real, honest to goodness TRN capability and has been
    given the money to do it. So we will have an official capability.
    We are starting by making the SIMPACT offering work in our environment,
    I am also told.
    
    Just thought you'd like to know.
    
    By the way. Why not look for ways to make things work, not reasons
    to reject?
    
    Ed  

    Well done, Ed ! 
    
    You sock it to 'em. Some of these moaning minnies really get to
    me. A bit of positive thinking never hurt anyone.
    
    We certainly support your enthusiasm this side of the water.
    
    Michael.