Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

Most of us in this conference are database people and look at the world
with a DEC/Database perspective.  But, there are also people in this
company with other perspectives.  In the case of financial packages
there is an entire organization, FABS, devoted to marketing same.  Most
(but not all) of these groups are sensitive to the DEC/Database
perspective of the world, but they still have a defined job to do.  In
FABS case, their job is to get DEC into finance departments.  It turns
out, according to the FABS people, that unlike the VMS world there is
one and only one quality package for UNIX systems: ORACLE FINANCIALS.
So, they basically have the option of punting on all sales of UNIX
systems into Finance Departments or pushing ORACLE.  I believe that
their Salary Continuation Plan requires that they make the unpleasant
(to us) choice.

The sooner someone comes up with a good ORACLE FINANCIALS competitor on
UNIX, the sooner we can stop recommending (or at least downplay) ORACLE.

    As one of the FABS "Marketing Dudes", let me say that the ORACLE
    database, CASE tools, etc. run on our RISC machines, and they
    were omitted in error (by the folks responsible for databases,
    case tools, etc, not us application dudes).
    
    We are losing business every week (ask me, I get the calls), from
    around the world due to our inability to have "high level" ULTRIX
    based accounting and admin. products available.  Digital does not
    have it now in this area, and we are responsible for fixing that.
    It will take many years & megabucks to get our classic mainframe
    oriented vendors to migrate, so we have to work with other classes
    of vendors.  We do have some good folks who are committe to deliver
    product in a year or so, but we need to make a decision to pass
    on all the business until then, or do whatever we can to pay the
    bills until then.  Don't get me wrong, we don't like it, but until
    an appropriate executive tells us to forget all this business, we
    will go after it.
    
    If anyone out there knows of any finance, accounting, payroll, fixed
    asset, human resources, financial budgeting, or reporting products
    that could be ported to ULTRIX asap, please forward the information
    to me.  This includes the public sector as well as the private sector
    market.
    
    Thanks
    
    Mark Silverberg
    FABS Open Systems Marketing Consultant
    264-2269
    

    Thanks for the reply, Mark.  You answered the question we all have been
    wanting to know .... it's an executive decision. We in the field
    understand that everyone has their job and the associated metrics and
    we certainly appreciate your honesty. 

    Understand where we are coming from.  You can't begin to imagine
    how difficult it is to unseat Oracle once they have a license anywhere
    within a customer's organization.   Once they're implanted and the
    customer has staff trained to handle dba functions, the opportunities
    or DECtp products (ACMS, Rdb, DECintact, CDD+), OA products (ALL-IN-1,
    DECdecision, DECwrite), and hardware (workstations, servers, production
    systems) suddenly lose all their margin $ IF we are lucky enough
    to win against Pyramid, Sequent, et al.
    
    I would be very interested in the profile of the companies that are
    seeking Ultrix financial solutions (as opposed to VMS or anything
    else).  I understand the price/performance issues but what else is
    driving this movement ?

    Also, what assurances (in writing) do you (we) have from Oracle that
    if we bring them in on a financial deal, they won't bait and switch
    to Sequent now or when the customer wants to upgrade ?
    
    -- gerry "not_mad_at_you_but_hate_Oracle" duncan
        
        

    Gerry:  I know we're all in this together, so we need to make the
    best of the situation.  We recognize the ORACLE situation, and are
    pushing as many of our vendors as possible to Rdb, especially thru
    the RSVP program, which we hope will help us bear fruit.  However,
    the singular focus on Rdb prevents us from send the right message
    regarding open systems and ULTRIX/SQL. 
    
    From an account perspective, we hear mostly about mid-size to large
    accounts ($100M & up) who have heard and are beginning to understand
    the promise of "open systems".  The smaller accounts are usually
    able to be taken care of by our smaller, lower end ULTRIX based vendors
    in niche markets.  Some of our Corporate Accounts are evaluating
    the possibility of moving to an open systems environment from an
    architectural perspective, and they are looking for potential 
    partners to work with them as they move forward.  We need to insure
    that Digital is positioned as that partner, and we need to create
    all the value points that such a partner should be able to demonstrate.
    This is amplified in Europe and GIA, as there is a more positive
    approach to UNIX and open systems than what we see in the States.          
    We are also hearing from some accounts that we need to tone down
    our Rdb pitch, as they don't see it fitting into their UNIX/open
    system or 3rd party db vendor plans.  Just what we need to hear
    as we are just getting good at it 8^)                                                         
    
    Dave Grainger, as well as many other executives, recognize the need
    to create appropriate alliances with vendors like ORACLE to help
    us leverage our combined strengths over IBM.  Getting support from
    the field, and other parts of the Corp., is critical to achieving
    that combined winning force.  Until that happens, HP, Sequent, Tandem,
    etal will be perceived as the more aggressive partnering vendors.
                                               
    The computer market is growing at about 7% per year, Digital's market
    growth is 10-12%, and UNIX is 26%.  As OSF and USO/UI/ATT settle
    their differences, a single UNIX will emerge as the O/S for Open
    Systems.  This will kick off an broader expansion of the market,
    and we need to insure Digital is not left behind.  The O/S will
    become less important, and other value added points will become more
    important, like database, dictionary, compilers, CASE/application
    tools, networking, APPLICATIONS, etc.  We have significant weaknesses
    in these areas that need to be addressed asap.  Many of the 3rd
    party sw vendors will be poised to take immediate advantage of this
    commercial market expansion, and we need to partner with these folks
    until we get our own act together, which will take years.
                                           
    One thing for sure...it's not a dull world!!
    Good luck & keep banging away!!
    Mark
    

    Mark, and all,
    
    I have recently returned from the TP DU:IT, where I noticed some
    extremely disturbing behaviours, for DEC folk, mostly around the
    discussion of ORACLE. What I found most disturbing was the personal
    contumely surrounding the discussion. I fear that we have learned this,
    or are beginning to do so, from some of the very competitors we deride.
    
    Let me explain my thoughts.
    
    Several decades ago, a very intellegent and feeling group of people,
    led by Mr. Olsen, set out to change an entire industry. The industry
    at which they tilted consisted of machines that were served by people.
    Their great idea was that "interactive" computing would free the people
    of an organization to use this great tool of theirs, computing, to do
    themselves some good. They would learn, grow and share information for
    their common weal, not just "process data".
    
    This idea worked, thank the heavens.
    
    Today we face a similar situation, though not identical. The enabling
    technologies of software show the promise of allowing really
    unobstructed access to information as interactive computing allowed
    unobstructed access to the machine.
    
    The core of our "interactive" philosophy is then embodied in our
    software philosphy as open systems. We do not define "open systems" as
    portable systems, identical systems, or even standard systems. We
    define open systems a accessible systems. We believe that our products
    and services are there to serve an obligation to deliver information
    freely to people who need it to get their jobs done. We also, and let
    remind you SECONDARILY, believe that this is a valuable service for
    which we deserve a fair price.
    
    Rdb is an open system . It is connected and connectable to a growing
    plethora of systems. It is our product philosophy to support, at OUR
    expense, the industry standards which ensure permanent accessibility to
    the information contained in it.
    
    We have a ways to go on ULTRIX.
    
    It is my opinion, and I believe others would hold the same, that there
    are other organizations that maintain a different standard. That
    "style", if you will, is to, by product design and delivery, business
    practices with customers and marketing against competitors, throttle
    the flow of information in their customer's organizations through a
    point at which the vendor generates whatever revenue they can squeeze
    out of the customer.
    
    In other words, a lot of us in software feel very strongly
    against working with software vendors whose clear purpose is to use us
    in their efforts to hold our customer's lifeblood, information, for
    ransom and milk the danegeld of fees and "customization" from their
    businesses.
    
    I believe the current nastiness is some of our bile, at having to
    publicly tolerate this, leaking out in private. 
    
    Mark, sometimes it is necessary to walk away from business. I have done
    it, and I'm sure you have, too. Sometimes it is also necessary to say
    "no" to your boss, mean it and stick to your guns. One of the reasons I
    work for DEC is that I get away with this, because of our "do the right
    thing" philosophy.
    
    Another reason I work for DEC is that we always "do the right thing"
    for our customers. That's very important to me.
    
    I think it is very much the wrong thing to assist in placing ANY
    solution in a customer's shop which locks out fair competition,
    efficiency and access to information. We don't cure the sick with
    leeches any more.
                   
    By the way, ORACLE's offering about a $15,000 increase up front, a
    negotiable signing bonus and commission money. I say no, and I mean it.
    I like sleeping soundly.
    
    Let me know if you have a different impression.
    
    Feel free to show this to Mr. Grainger. Please don't edit it.
    
    thomas

    Hear, Hear, Thomas!!
    

    
    Seen at DU IT - Oracle competition
    
    One of the demoed RSVP applications was a fianancial package from MEGA.
    Today this is VMS/Rdb/DECforms/Windows with plans to support our Ultrix
    needs as well later this year.
    
    They can layer on an Oracle look and feel if that's important. Also do
    the same for MSA financials when competing against IBM platforms.
    
    Currently moving into the US market
    
    Contact: Sean Donegan  216-328-0100	
    
                                                                     

    Apart from what Thomas said.  Is this agreement with the same Oracle
    company who resently ran full page advertisments in industry
    publications (in Australia).  The Adds read in inch high letters -
    
    	   "	Rdb is so bad they can not give it away.    "
    
            ???????????????????????????????????????????????????
    I know that you can not choose you relatives but !!!!!
    
    Vince  

Thomas,
    
    If what you saw at DU:IT was a little offensive, I would say we were
    being rather restrained...  If it offended you personally, I apologize
    for all of us.
    
	"What I found most disturbing was the personal contumely surrounding 
    	the discussion."
    
    In which session did you see this most prevalent?  I found Oracle
    mentioned in about 90% of them.   Since we are the subject of a
    continuous barrage of anti-Digital advertising in the trades thanks to
    our 'partners' at Oracle, what did you expect to see, approbation?
    
    Sad to say this Oracle saga may worsen...I just read your note about
    January 1.
    
    Gil
    
    
    
    

    Hi Gil,
    
    I didn't say offended, and I didn't mean it. When I said disturbed, I
    meant I felt really bad (sorry, ashamed, maybe a little angry) that
    people outside our organization can so affect us and our organization
    to promote the behaviour of personal invective, in public, over ANY
    subject.
    
    Yeah, I know that we at DEC call a spade a spade, but some people are
    saying some pretty nasty things about other people, when what we should
    be concentrating on is how we feel about serving the needs of our
    customers. A major part of why I joined (and stay with) DEC is this
    respect, if not fervor, for "doing the right thing".
    
    I just wanted to remind everyone that we should not emulate the
    behaviour of any people or organizations who are not similarly
    committed. It may cost us some small thing in the short term, but we
    live with that. We are the good guys.
    
    In reference to having to sell something in the short term, a quick
    question. What do we really loose? I mean, I'm sure the other guys are
    still going to sell as hard as they can, so we still will cert boxes.
    
    There is the argument that if we bring a third party in, we manage the
    situation and keep them from bait-and-switching to another hardware
    vendor. We then ensure said hardware certs.
    
    Does anybody really believe we can "manage" ORACLE's behaviour?
    
    So, I see this as a balance between an small, risky revenue gain for
    Digital (the company ONLY profits from HW in an ORACLE sale), and a
    definite disservice to the customer in introducing a
    "control-by-access" vendor.
    
    I vote for distancing ourselves from such insidious sales tactics, but
    I stress taking the high road in doing so. We do not lie, cheat, steal
    and/or insult ANYONE, publically. We enforce openness, cooperation,
    standards and accessability, and we strongly encourage our customers
    and partners to do the same.
    
    If anybody who can do so is listening, I believe that an executive
    committee-level statement of just this philosophy would very much
    assist the field in selling Digital solutions.
    
    As to which session was the "one" where I noticed the bile, you were
    right, it was DU:IT TP/BD - ALL (or, as you say, 90%) of it.
    
    
    thomas
    

Cross posted, without permission, from Marketing.

             <<< NODEMO::$1$DJA2:[NOTES$LIBRARY]MARKETING.NOTE;1 >>>
                   -< Marketing - Digital Internal Use Only >-
================================================================================
Note 979.35                 Oracle Perception Problem                   35 of 37
SAGE::ROSS "Noting Lambada-style"                    26 lines  29-MAR-1990 11:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a less than positive article on Oracle's Financials applications
software in this week's Information Week {3/26, p.62}.

Some interesting quotes:

	"It's totally unacceptable," says Craig Sebaetti, manager of
        business systems for M/A-COM Inc.'s government systems division
        in San Diego, CA.  "With any problem we have, their solution is
	to upgrade.   In some cases we just threw up our hands and told
	the users they would have to wait until the next release".

        Dick Cross, manager of programming for phone company Cellular 
	Inc. in Englewood, CO. and an Oracle general ledger user doesn't
	find fault in Oracle's support "per se".  "There are so many
	bugs, so many omissions in the program that it just CAN'T BE
	SUPPORTED".   According to Cross, Oracle has promised to fix bugs
	and cover omissions in several versions in the past without
	delivering.   "The software is so full of bugs that it will
	take a long time befor eit is a first-rate product".

	"The people who use the Financial package on Unix seem to
	 be having an easier time than those of us who have been
	 using it on VAX's and HP minicomputers".