Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

1095.0. "Misleading Rdb information in Oracle's marketing literature" by COOKIE::OAKEY (The Last Bugcheck - The Sequel) Sat Feb 22 1992 19:43

                        ***** DIGITAL CONFIDENTIAL *****


        +---------------------------+ TM
        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
        | d | i | g | i | t | a | l |             INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
        +---------------------------+
          "The New Software Group"



        TO: Lars Brunsgaard              FROM:  Michael Brey
            Ken England                  DATE:  21 February 1992
            Vickie Farrell               DEPT:  Software Performance Group
            Barry Needleman              LOC:   CXN/6
            Ketil Rolien                 DTN:   523-2881
                                         ENET:  COOKIE::BREY
        CC: Steve Hagan
            Walt Kohler
            Linda Wright



	As many of you are aware, ORACLE has been campaigning quite
	strongly against Rdb/VMS.  Advertisements and customer contact 
        has been widely occurring both in Europe and the U.S.
	Much of the data for their campaign has come from recent
	Rdb/VMS TPC-B benchmarks performed by Database Associates under
	contract to Oracle as well as data from the Four-Node
	VAX 6000-540 VAXcluster test we ran over a year ago.

	It was brought to our attention that some of the data ORACLE
	used in their campaign was misleading and simply incorrect.
	We took this information to the Transaction Processing
	Performance Council (TPC) and they found ORACLE to be in
	violation of the TPC's Fair Use and Confidentiality Policy.
	Oracle was informed of this violation and was asked to
	remedy the situation.

	What does this mean and how does this decision effect Digital?

	First, all decisions and actions taken by the TPC are considered
	confidential to the TPC and member companies unless specifically
	released for public distribution.  Therefore, the TPC's action
	against Oracle is confidential information and cannot be
	distributed outside of Digital.  

	Second, ORACLE has been asked to stop distributing this
	information and to withdraw any known misleading information.
	The TPC will not police ORACLE's "cleanup" activities nor will
	they involve themselves in marketing disputes among companies.  

	Third, in order for the TPC to have enough grounds to publicly
	cite ORACLE, ORACLE would have to repeat their offense.  Any
	new information that ORACLE distributes about the VAXcluster
	test should be collected and copies sent to COOKIE::BREY
	(Fax 719-260-2912).

	How do you deal with customers who have already been influenced
	by the information distributed by ORACLE?  We cannot tell them
	that ORACLE has been found in violation of the fair use policy
	but we can have customers contact the TPC administrator, Kim
	Shanley, to answer any questions the customer might have about
	Oracle's claims.  Kim can be reached at

		       Shanley Public Relations
                       777 N. First St., Suite 600
                       San Jose, Ca 95112

		       408-295-8894 
                     
	Digital also has a document stating why they withdrew the
	VAXcluster results.  This memo can be given to a customer.
	A copy of the memo is attached.





































ORACLE is a registered trademark of Oracle Corporation.  TPC-B is a trademark 
of the Transaction Processing Performance Council.  Rdb/VMS is a trademark of
Digital Equipment Corporation.


                        ***** DIGITAL CONFIDENTIAL *****



	+---------------------------+ TM
   	|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   	| d | i | g | i | t | a | l |		MEMORANDUM
   	|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
   	+---------------------------+




	TO:   Kim Shanley, TPC Administrator	DATE:  7 August 1991
              Shanley Public Relations

        FROM: Walt Kohler, TPC Representative
              Digital Equipment Corporation

	CC:   Bill Keats, TPC TAB Chairperson
              Control Data Corporation

	SUBJECT:  Request to Withdraw VAX 6000-540 VAXcluster TPC-B Test

	Digital requests to withdraw the Four-Node VAX 6000-540
	VAXcluster TPC-B TPC-B test, since it does not conform to the
	revised TPC-B specifications approved at the July 1991 TPC
	meeting.

	Vickie Farrell, Digital Equipment Corporation's Database Systems
	Marketing Manager, has approved the release of the following
	statement concerning the VAXcluster test:  "It is unfortunate
	that the TPC modified the testing specifications after so many
	tests had been run and results published and then required those
	results to conform to the new specifications.  It is Digital's
	intent to comply with all specifications as defined by the
	council, so we are withdrawing our TPC-B results because they no
	longer comply.  All TPC-B tests run in the future will be in full
	compliance with the revised guidelines.  It is important to note
	that the revised specifications do not impact Digital's TPC-A
	tests results.

	Digital is committed to extending the scope of the TPC test
	suites to reflect a wider range of applications and more
	realistic workloads.  To that end, we promote the adoption of the
	TPC-C Order-Entry test by the council."

	Re. .0

	> Any
	> new information that ORACLE distributes about the VAXcluster
	> test should be collected and copies sent to COOKIE::BREY

	Not just any information about the VAXcluster. If you find that Oracle
	is distributing misleading information about any of our TPC results,
	these should be sent to Mike Brey, or to me (Amitabh Shah, santur::shah)

	-amitabh.