Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

Everytime I see a request for help in selling a product that competes
with Rdb/VMS, my blood boils.  Now that's a pretty neat trick since I've
just about spilled all of my blood working to make Rdb/VMS the best
general purpose relation DB system available.  However, I then have the
pleasure of watching the fine readers of this conference blast them.
So, I kind of like to see requests for help selling competitive products.  It
usually results in:

1) The field person receiving pressure from their peers on the subject
of "why are you selling a competitor to Rdb/VMS".

or

2) No substantial assistance, which should tell the person trying to sell
the competitive product something about how much informal help they can expect
from the rest of the DEC community in supporting this sale (and the
customer after the fact).

Contrast this with the amount of help people tend to provide when there
are technical or sales questions about Rdb/VMS.  People from all over
the world (and I do mean all over) will usually jump in and help,
sometimes within minutes.  Most of these people are doing it on their
own, rather than as part of their job.

I have sympathy for the sales situation where the customer is really
committed to a database system and is just shopping for hardware.  I
have no sympathy for anyone who is going along with a 3rd party software
sale because it's the path of least resistance. DEC really upped the
investment in engineering for Rdb/VMS and friends a couple of years ago
and the results are really starting to be visible. A similar ramp-up in
marketing and support activities is underway.

So, I'm against the moderator exercising censorship powers over requests
for assitance to make competitive sales.  I'd rather anyone seeking such
assistance have to face the growing engineering, marketing, and support
aligned with VAX Rdb/VMS.

    I am also against censorship.  The number of requests that I have
    seen for help on 3rd party products, have been a good indicator
    of some of the problems with those products.  If there is a need
    to support these products then lets create a separate conference
    (called USELESS_DB's?) which allows people to exchange information
    on other DB products for post-sales support.
    
    So to sum up, do not censor the notes (though I sympathise with
    your position).  They provide a lot of good information about the
    needs of us grunts when we are forced to work with 3rd party stuff.
    As noted by .1, it also provides a great way to apply peer pressure
    (your selling product XXX????!!!! ...polite disbelief).  I would
    also like to make the case that people asking for configuration
    information on a 3rd party product should go to the particular vendor
    for it.  Unless you need it for competitive reasons, you are not
    going to get it here.
    
    Keep those cards and letters coming!  This is a great conference!
    
    							Neil

    I agree that Rdb is the best Relational Database on VMS.  People
    selling other db products on VMS without a damned good reason should
    be shot.  Those with a damned good reason should just be hung.
    
    However.                                                      
    
    There are occasions when a customer wants to populate there VAX
    systems with a UNIX variant in place of, or, as well as VMS.  When
    these customers request a common database management product we
    have to either go with a 3rd party product or convince them that
    an all VMS solution is best for them.  The latter becomes much harder
    when workstations are involved.   In these situations details on
    how to make the chosen product as successful as possible are in
    Digital's interest if it is to retain the hardware portion of the
    sale, and the customer's confidence.
    
    This conference is the ideal place for such discussions (please
    don't split the discussion into ANOTHER conference).  In addition,
    more of the other products' weaknesses will come to light through
    shared details which will help in future competitive situations.
    
    Of course, when/if Rdb runs on UNIX this discussion will become
    academic :-).
    
    Cheers, Martin

    I too am not in favor of censorship.
    
    I also am not real fond of selling 3rd party solutions, or seeing
    those getting sold to our clients where I think digital has a better
    solution.
    
    RDB is one of those things that has over the years garnered for
    itself a rather bad reputation.  I think that a lot of corrective
    action has been taken in this area.  BUT to a large extent (from
    hearing people in the field talk), the reputation is still there.
    
    In the case of our salesie folk.  They don't want to back what they
    view as a loser.  And I am of the opinion that they don't want their
    sales to hinge on what they feel to be a "weak link".  SO, until
    the perceptions on the product change, I think you are stuck with
    digie folk selling 3rd party solutions, since they feel we don't
    have one.

    (I had a salesie guy come up to me the other day (new to this
    particular account), and point out how he was going to "push" ingres
    or oracle or one of those things for a corporate direction...
    *sigh*)
                        
    		Lou "Working in the fields" Northern

    
    The issue isn't just about using this conference, its also about using
    us, as technical resource, to assist the selling of other products.
    If I'd wanted to be a technical support specialist on Oracle, then
    I'd be working for them, rather than for DEC. If for some obscure
    but maybe valid reason a customer can only achieve certain objectives
    by NOT using Rdb, then all support/sizing/tuning etc should also
    go to that competitor, or we end up enhancing the product's reputation
    at DEC's expense ! But I agree with the rest of the replies that
    we now need to follow up technical investment in Rdb with a good
    sales/marketing push, to make Rdb's image reflect reality more
    closely - then maybe the problem'd arise less often.

    Chris
    

    This philosophy in the company of "We got the Iron, who cares about
    the Database Manager" goes deep in this company.  I DON'T LIKE THIS
    ATTITUDE.  The Sales Update Vol 19, number 15 made an announcement
    on page 63 that typifies this attitude.  "SCMP Agreement with Project
    Software & Development, Inc. (PSDI)".  In the product description
    is the following bullet:
    
    "PROJECT/2 is a complete and powerful minicomputer and mainframe
    system that runs exclusively on the Digital VAX family.  PSDI offers
    a turnkey solution with MicroVAX II, printer, color terminal, PROJECT/2
    scheduling, graphics software and relational database manager,
    ORACLE(tm) which starts at under $100,000."
    
    and alter:
                                           
    "Oracle RBMS		Based on the industry-standard structured query
     				language (SQL) ..."
    
    Digital is encouraging its Sales Reps to use Oracle as a solution.
    
    Larry
    

    This is an excellent conference and provides an educational service
    which would suffer with censorship.
    Ignorance (and highly tactical motivation) is in my opinion, the
    major problem Rdb ( and all VIA products) have to overcome in the
    field AND in Corporate .
    You have only to look at the shotgun approach this company takes
    at signing up CMPs left right and center to realize that its a short
    term mentality that some corporate folks unfortunately have. The
    only criteria that a CMP has to meet is "does it run on a VAX".
    
    The idea behind the CMP and SCMP program is a good one, its been
    mis-managed up till now!
    Basically I am saying the problem is one of education, as well as
    motivation.
    If the only way of getting the sale is using Oracle then ok I will
    help an account BUT I will spell out the risks involved to the
    appropriate VP or whatever - that in itself sometimes works wonders
    by the way.
    If it is a done deal with Oracle then make sure the Oracle people
    are HEAVILY tied up in supporting that account, common sense dictates
    that standard sales tactic.
    I have just got back from a short consulting trip, somewhere in
    the the USA, the senior DEC people involved in this large project
    are made up of "Industry" experts not long in DEC. Do they know
    DEC products? No way! Even the local software people are not seriously
    interested in Rdb even tho the account has specified a relational
    database as a requirement.
    I will be an ongoing part of this project, so we will see what happens.

    Things, they are a changin'
    
    Just came out of a meeting this morning.  Digital is going to in
    the future strive to be the "prime contractor", and contact for
    a customer.
    
    NOW, I read that as meaning that if we ain't got the particular
    solution for "our" customer, then we find it for them.  We don't
    have the luxury in today's environment to say "Well it ain't ours,
    so we aren't going to support it, or you".
    
    I think to the best of our abilities, we have to help "guide" the
    customer in the "right" direction, but failing that we have to do
    our damndest to help them work with what they have.
    
    Now if this means cluster tuning to run INGRES, or ORACLE, well,
    guess what?
    
    Also, whilst we are working on getting our customer into an RDB
    frame of mind, we can't lose sight of the fact that they have been
    using another product (S1032 in this case), and have a largish
    investment in applications, databases, etc.  That have been around
    since the old DEC-10 days.
    
    So, I guess my bottom line is: "No I don't want to support INGRES,
    but if I have to to support my customer and make them profitable
    that's what I'll do."
    
    	Lou "Who still doesn't care for getting kits from SDC" Northern

    Ok this topic has run for a week and the general opinion, supported
    by some good arguments, is for free speech even if we don't like
    what people are saying/selling/supporting.
    
    So, said he with relief, I don't feel that I should hide notes from
    people who want advice on our competitors.
    
    Thanks to all those who replied. And, although the main debate is
    over and the motion defeated, please continue the discussion in
    this topic if you have more to say on the subject, or have only
    just seen the note.
    
    	Andrew.

    Please see note 101.5 of this conference.
    
    When the decision to go with a competitive product has already been
    finalized (and possibly paid for) despite our best efforts I do
    not concur with the idea that we "walk away" from the customer.
    
    I think that in most cases when information on competitive products
    is requested in this conference it is in support of a Digital customer
    who has already COMMITTED the unspeakable, and is not a case of
    a Digital employee trying to SELL a competitive product. Instead
    the Digital employee is simply trying to maintain customer
    satisfaction.
    
    Is this so terrible that one would consider censorship? Do we simply
    walk away from customers who do not come to the same conclusions
    we do?  Should we also walk away from customers because they chose
    to implement an SNA network?  
    
    This all seems very inconsistant with the philosophy of "Selling
    Solutions" and our goal of "Customer Satisfaction".
    
    <><><><>  Sandy "one of the accused" Davis
    
    

    We should not have censorship. All inquiries should be accepted.
    No, we should not "walk away" from the customer. But neither should
    we pull out all the stops to try to solve problems created by other
    vendors.
    
    You will rarely see IBM people spending days on end figuring out
    a customer's problem with Datacom/DB.
    
    I think what all of us are saying here is the same. We cannot abandon
    customers. Indeed, we are obligated to support them wherever we
    can. But neither can we attempt to solve difficulties created by
    products over which we have no control, commitment, or expertise.
    
    That is a risk the customer accepts when he selects non-Digital system
    (database) software. And while this may seem obvious, let's consider
    how hard we would work to solve a network problem if the
    customer had VAXes hooked to an Ungermann-Bass network.
              
    These are difficult issues. Do not abandon a customer. But do not
    try to accept responsibility for things beyond your control.
    
    ---- Michael Booth
              

    re .7
    
    I agree with the statement that if a potential CMP can fog a mirror
    then sign 'em up!  We have had a similar problem in Canada with
    CMP's being signed up left right and center.  Some of these signers
    we in fact useful to leverage sales, but when we go out and sign
    up Powerhouse (and I think we had CINCOM at one point as well),
    the message we give to customers and our own personnel is confusing
    to say the least.  I agree with the problem stated of using industry
    'experts' with minimal DIGITAL (as in culture) experience.
    
    Solution?  One way is to keep pushing both software and sales to
    be aware of the technical advantages of RDB and a Vax Information
    Based Solution.  I have not seen many sales update articles which
    extol the technical virtues of RDB.  Have you ever seen any explanation
    to the field of the fact that our databases run in Exec mode, and
    what advantages this has?  Lets keep educating them about the problems
    of the other vendors.  Lets keep this notesfile open and avoid
    censorship by better education!  You can always refuse to answer
    queries about sizing product XYZ on a VAX!
    
    								Neil

VIA (with Rdb at the core) is coming of age. As this happens, I'm sure
that the problems mentioned here - namely Digital sales teams and their
customers being unaware of what is on offer - will go away as they realise (to 
coin a phrase) that "Digital has it now". I think that as the "now" becomes
reality, there will be a big swing towards our products. I look forward
to seeing a "Sales Update" special on VIA!

Finally (back on the original subject), I vote to keep the notesfile open to 
people wanting help to sell competitive products - this has to be the forum to 
make sure that they're aware of what they're doing before they pass over
Rdb.

    
	It can be presumptuous to assume how someone is
    using the information on third-party DBMS's.

	In my one experience with RDB_COMPETITION (Note 71), 
    I asked for information on benchmarks with Oracle on 
    VAX'es with respect to user load data. It evoked a
    response at selling a competitor's product, yet my reason
    for asking was that the customer (a mature Oracle shop)
    wanted to justify internally the acquisition of an 8530
    (which they really wanted), over an 8350. Any information I
    could have used would have gone to help us make a substantial
    amount of additional revenue. 

    RE: .7 & .12
    
    	In my space, in order for you to be a CMP or SCMP you MUST
        MEET the following minimum requirements
    
    		Your product must use RMS, DBMS-32, or RDB
    		Your product must support the Distributed Lock
    		     Management Function on the VAXcluster system
    
        Missing either one gets you a reference in the VAX SOFTbase,
        but no cigar.
    
    Ken