geoff@callan.UUCP (09/05/84)
The following (totally false) article appeared in "Unique: the UNIX System Information Source". Following the article is an open letter to them, answering their allegations. Please do not believe their article without reading my answer and deciding for yourself. >Some "inside" information on Callan Data Systems...Although they have had >UNIX System V since November, the "real" end-user release only came out a >month or two ago. Current bug is the lack of ability to address hard disk >"bad tracks" under standard System V. CDS was considering a private stock >"buy-out" by I/O Data of Washington up until recently that would have >netted them about $25 million in capital. They backed down when I/O >essentially wanted an EPROM burning center in California, not a super-micro >builder. The CDS new model 300 as seen in the ads is really a "mock-up". >Besides the show machine, the "real" end-user 300's just started going out >the door. The software development staff is definitely a hard-charging >group...lots of OT and dead-lines and they DO want CDS to succeed. One >of their next goals is to develop a "Window"-like interface to System V. Following is my complete response: >To: wlbr!ihnp4!harpo!infopro!unique >Subject: /dev/rumor > >I realize you are subject to publication delays and deadlines. I also >realize the title of your column. Nevertheless, when you are risking >major damage to the reputation of a small struggling company, I would >think you might at least take the trouble of making a phone call. There >are a number of people here who could have set your facts straight, as >well as any of our field personnel. Your article was remarkably full of >inaccuracies for something that only filled half a column. > >First, and foremost, a truly false allegation that I take quite personally: >Callan Data Systems WAS the first on the market with System V, and the first >"real" release started going out the door in December, with volume shipments >in January. I should know: I produced that release. The first beta >shipment was on September 15th, to Bunker Ramo (now Eaton Electronic >Systems) in Westlake Village. Further beta shipments were made in October, >and the software shown at Comdex was essentially the same as that shipped >in December. We called this release 4.0P1; the P stood for "preliminary" >because we had had difficulty with the parallel printer driver and wanted >to leave ourselves a way to ship an updated release in February. When we >discovered that the parallel printer problem was with the particular >printer being used for testing, we decided there was little point in making >a new release just for a name change. The April release, 4.1, differed >remarkably little from the December release, incorporating mostly minor >bug fixes (I could actually send you differences if you cared--we have >excellent configuration management). One of our competitors misunderstood >a published interview with David Callan and concluded that our April release >was our first; this was published as a letter to Computer Systems News a >few weeks ago. Unfortunately, as you would have found had you bothered >to make even a cursory check of the facts, it is untrue. > >The same applies to your totally false claim that "'real' end-user 300's just >started going out the door". As any of our customers can tell you, the 300 >was first shipped in December (to Karl Balke Associates), and volume shipments >began in January. There have been two significant engineering changes since >then: the power supply has been modified to reduce noise, and the control >panel (four membrane switches and a 16-character LCD) has been redesigned. >I do not think these differences justify calling the current 300 the "real" >one. These are normal engineering improvements that any company makes, usually >without any fanfare. It *is* true that the 300 seen in our ads was a mockup; >that ad was photographed last summer when the 300 was still in development. >Since the mockup shows the size and styling of the unit quite accurately, we >see no reason to spend money to rephotograph a real unit just to avoid false >claims by sloppy reporters. > >As to the stock buyout by "I/O Data of Washington", try Data I/O, the leaders >in PROM-burning. The deal was reported long ago in the trade press, with >Data I/O identified correctly. Your other facts on the deal are essentially >correct, although this is the first time I heard that they wanted a >PROM-burning center. This seems especially unlikely since Data I/O makes >PROM burners, but does not run a PROM burning service (indeed, it seems >unlikely that such a service could be made profitable, given the low cost >of PROM burners). > >Finally, let me bring you up to date on one of the two parts of your article >which actually were accurate. In April (which appears to be when your >information was acquired), we did indeed have some fairly bad problems with >hard disk errors. The few customers who had the worst problems suffered quite >badly for a while. However, that problem was solved in April and now is not >a problem for anyone. The last hard disk error I had was repaired in 30 >minutes; most of that time was spent fsck-ing the SMD drives I use for >Unix sources. > >It is true that our software staff is a hard-working and outstanding group. >I am quite proud of our accomplishments in the past year. It is too bad that >your newsletter is so careless as to print unchecked rumors that damage our >reputation so badly. > >On behalf of all the employees of Callan Data Systems, I would like to request >a retraction of this false report. A column like /dev/rumor is a useful >thing, but journalistic responsibility calls for a quick telephone check before >you publish claims like these. You have accused us of lying in our advertising >and to our customers; these are fairly serious charges. Please correct the >record before you do more damage. Geoff Kuenning Manager of Operating Systems Development Callan Data Systems ...!ihnp4!wlbr!callan!geoff -- Geoff Kuenning Callan Data Systems ...!ihnp4!wlbr!callan!geoff ...!ihnp4!wlbr!desint!geoff