Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

    I guess I am not sure of what your problem is for this agreement.
    
    It allows Digital Government Sales Reps to sale to secure environment
    accounts on ULTRIX if and only if they need a B1 secure database.
    
    It has nothing to do with VMS and is not much different than any DDS
    agreement for ULTRIX.
    
    Since ULTRIX/SQL does not provide this functionality, what do you
    think we should do in order to get this market?
    
    chuck

    My main concern is that we are seen to be legitimising a competitors
    product. Ok, so the agreement may cover a niche market, but I bet that
    gets blurred in time and we find Sybase exploiting the links and
    pushing onto VMS.

    Re:  .2
    
    The blurr is already occurring - I went to the local Sybase seminar
    in our area a day or 2 after the agreement was announced; part of
    the introductory slide show had a section that heralded marketing
    agreements with major vendors - of which Digital was included on the
    list - no mention of Ultrix/Government Systems/B1 security.  Virtually
    the next slide showed all the platforms that Sybase runs on - including
    VMS.
    
    The perception (and the game is always perception) is that Sybase
    and Digital have an agreement for their product suite - not just
    to fill a niche market.
    

    While I appreciate the point you're making, Chuck, I think .3's comment
    is right on the mark.  I didn't know that the agreement was for ULTRIX,
    only.  I wonder who else didn't.
    
    What I think we need is a party line for these agreements, so that we
    know what to say when we hear things, such as what I heard from a
    Software QA manager, with considerable say in the database purchase
    decision at a *MAJOR* bank, based here in L.A.:
    
    "I see you guys are selling SYBASE, now."  I knew we were selling some
    kind of Sybase for something, but that's all. The sales rep standing there
    apparently knew a little more and said (I think) "Well that's just 
    for secure environments."  Then the customer says "You're sending a
    mixed message.  With that and *other* [I heard it dripping with 
    innuendo] agreements, it seems you'll do anything if it sells hardware."
    I couldn't even say that it was for ULTRIX, only.
    
    If we were briefed or warned about these things, in advance, we could
    have a good answer ready.  If we had some way of knowing that the
    corporation was squarely behind Rdb, and that they're aware of the 
    situation we are placed in when our "partners" take advantage of these 
    agreements and make them sound like wholesale endorsements, maybe we
    wouldn't feel like Rodney Dangerfield.
    
    We're out here telling our customers that Rdb is an
    important part of their solution and they have the "perceived" truth in
    their hands that, in fact, we've endorsed Oracle and Sybase, not to
    mention Ingres on ULTRIX.
    
    I still don't know, for sure, what to say about the Oracle agreement,
    but by the way the press release was worded ("sweeping?"), by Oracle, I'm
    sure (somebody should be ashamed!), it comes out sounding like a
    wedding engagement for marriage made in heaven.
    
    Bruce

    
    Look Bruce, you don't have to flame me.  If you can not keep up with
    what is going on in the database wars, then don't use this as method to
    vent your frustrations.  There are times when things are out of our
    hands and we have to accept things as they are.  Not always can the
    corporation tell you about things which are about to happen (something
    about inside information) and when it comes out, the press releases may
    have just been finished being approved the night before.  EVERY article
    I read stated that the agreement was for ULTRIX.  I do not know how
    much clearer this can be.  It seems as if your sales person can keep up
    better than you (although not entirely correct).
    
    As for your comments on being taken advantage of:  We have (over 1
    billion times I would bet) stated publicly and informally that if a
    third party is taking advantage by misleading a customer, if you will
    document that by a letter from the customer stating that XXX rep
    stated these facts which are misleading, then we would correct the 
    problem by either putting pressure to make sure it does not happen again 
    and if it continues to be documented (and 5 times can do it), then we 
    will cancel the contract.
    
    TO THIS DATE (AND OVER THE PAST AT LEAST 1.5 YEARS), WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDED 
    WITH A GRAND TOTAL OF (ZERO, NADA, NONE, ZIP) DOCUMENTED CASES OF THIS.  
    Does this mean it does not happen.  No.  But what can we do legally to 
    clear up this situation.  I personally tried to do this with an 
    undocumented case.  Come to find out, it was someones dream of what might 
    happen, and it got my A** cleaned.  Not again.
    
    If your customer does not wish to provide the documentation, then you
    could (if possible) be creative and try to turn the situation around to
    be a positive.  That is, ask for a copy of the press release or get a
    copy out of a trade rag, and say "would you feel comfortable with a
    company who would go out of there way to mislead or misrepresent this
    relationship to you?"  If yes, then they get what they deserve.  If no,
    then it is back to even playing ground.  The bottom line is complaining
    here does no good.  You could take the time and submit an impact report
    (yeah, I used to be in the field and I submitted them alot....Guess
    what, you would be surprised who reads them - if they get pass your
    mgmt) and explain why your job to sell is hindered by these agreements. 
    When your (Customer Services/Sales) mgmt decides that it is time that they
    should rear their ugly heads and complain that these things are killing 
    us, then things will change.  But until then, documented proof is the
    ONLY thing that will.
    
    PLEASE, do not think that I am FOR any of these agreements.  In fact,
    most of them I am against, but will support because that is what we
    *should* do.  As a corporate citizen, I can not go to a customer and
    say "Boy, DEC sure is stupid to sign these".  That is more damaging
    than the agreements themselves.  I would go out of my way to get the 
    documented cases so that it could be shown that these agreements are 
    *harmful* to the corporation.
    
    As for the Sybase seminar, I do not think that they did anything wrong. 
    They did not mislead (according to what was said in the reply - since I
    was not there I can not attest that this is fact) by stating that they
    have an agreement with Digital.  If they were asked, is this for both
    VMS and ULTRIX and they said yes, then that is misrepresentation.  But
    alas, that is my interpretation.
    
    well, I have said my peace.  Let the flames begin ;-{  !

    Worldwide News                                                 LIVE WIRE
                                                                   June 25, 1990
                Sybase port is 1000th RISC/UNIX application

    Sybase, Inc., has ported the SYBASE system to Digital RISC platforms,
    marking the 1000th RISC application available for Digital's RISC-based 
    DECsystem and DECstation family of products. 

    "The 1000th RISC application is a significant milestone in Digital's 
    RISC/ULTRIX strategy and demonstrates Digital's commitment to the open 
    systems market," said Dom LaCava, vice president, Low End Systems. 
    "The number of RISC/ULTRIX-based applications is growing at a rate of 
    100 per month." 

    SYBASE is an SQL-based relational database management system designed 
    explicitly for online applications.  It is based on an advanced client/
    server architecture and consists of two components.  SYBASE SQL Server 
    handles all data management functions, including the enforcement of data 
    integrity rules.  SYBASE SQL Toolset is a set of development and decision 
    support tools that allow users to build and run applications on either 
    character terminals or bitmapped workstations. 

    Digital's RISC/ULTRIX applications are available from Complementary 
    Solutions Organizations (CSOs), who cooperate with Digital to ensure that 
    the customer has access to a flexible, effective portfolio of solutions. 

    Sybase Inc., headquartered in Emeryville, Calif., develops and markets 
    the SYBASE system, the only RDBMS that meets the requirements of online 
    applications.  These requirements are scalable high performance, high 
    availability, open distributed DBMS, and adaptable windowing tools. 
    Sybase markets its products worldwide to OEMs, value added resellers 
    and end-users. 

---
UNIX is a registered trademark of American Telephone & Telegraph Company.
SYBASE, SYBASE SQL Server and SYBASE SQL Toolset are trademarks of Sybase, Inc.

    I hope no one reads into Dom's statement that there is any kind of
    agreement.  This only says that Sybase has ported their software to the
    ULTRIX/RISC, just like 1000 other products.