pasek@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Michael A. Pasek) (10/16/89)
In article <847@metaphor.Metaphor.COM> philf@xymox.metaphor.com (Phil Fernandez) writes: >Wait a minute. Remember that many three-piece-suited executives >making buying decisions know plenty about IBM's upcoming product and >announcment, and are making wait-or-buy decisions based on those >facts. Wasn't IBM enjoined from "pre-announcing" products more than X months (or years) before they were to be available ? Specifically to prevent the "Well, I might as well wait and see what IBM's product looks like before I spend money on vendor X's equipment/software..." (nevermind that vendor X's equipment/software is available today) ? >For example, I was recently down to IBM's Advanced Workstation >Division Austin center for a full briefing about the new IBM RISC >line. I've seen and touched the boxes; I've heard concrete >architecture, price and performance information. I definitely have >enough information to make a wait/buy decision. (No comment on the >decision; I'm under non-disclosure :) So....it looks like they are still pre-announcing, they just have you sign a little piece of legal material that says you won't TELL anybody that they did it..... This (unfortunately) appears to be the way to "make it" in today's business world. You don't have to come up with anything new or innovative, just take somebody else's sweat and make everyone THINK that yours will be NEW AND IMPROVED. By the time it hits the market, everyone will have already ordered a zillion of them, and too many butts will be on the line to say "Geez, this is nothing new" (after all, this equipment/software is usually over-priced to cover the marketing costs -- how would you tell your CEO that you just paid twice as much and waited a year for something that was already available). OK, I'm off the soapbox now.....and back (somewhat) to reality. I don't mean to bash ALL of IBM, as they do come up with some good stuff (now and then). And IBM is far from alone in the "let's develop a good marketing story" arena. Personally, I long for the days (past or future) when a product stands on its own merits. >phil > >p.s. Oh, I only wore a two-piece suit... Must have been the dress-code at the plant :-) >+-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------+ >| Phil Fernandez | philf@metaphor.com | >| | ...!{apple|decwrl}!metaphor!philf | >| Metaphor Computer Systems |"Does the body rule the mind, or does the mind| >| Mountain View, CA | rule the body? I dunno..." - Morrissey | >+-----------------------------+----------------------------------------------+ M. A. Pasek Switching Software Development NCR Comten, Inc. (612) 638-7668 CNG Development 2700 N. Snelling Ave. pasek@c10sd3.StPaul.NCR.COM Roseville, MN 55113
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (10/19/89)
In article <1629@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM>, pasek@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Michael A. Pasek) writes: | This (unfortunately) appears to be the way to "make it" in today's | business world. You don't have to come up with anything new or | innovative, just take somebody else's sweat and make everyone THINK | that yours will be NEW AND IMPROVED. I don't think the quote of firm (a) price, (b) performance (if I get to measure it) and (c) delivery date is a problem. What used to happen is that IBM and others would say "we have a great new system coming out in January which will really beat what's on the market." With not details there was a lot of wait and see. IBM was really bashed by a number of people including me for NOT sharing some near term plans with major customers, because we bought equipment which really was obsolete in a few months. Right now most of the major vendors (I shouldn't name them) have meetings with us on a regular basis, and we make plans based on what's coming. It doesn't always result in a wait, many time we see that the new product is not enough better that what we can get now. In a number of companies with a yearly budget, you *can't* wait, or the money vanished at the end of the year. I admit that I don't really like IBM, but information which improves planning accuracy is a big win for the customer, and nothing to criticize. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (10/19/89)
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) writes: | ...pasek@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Michael A. Pasek) writes: | | ...You don't have to come up with anything new or | | innovative, just take somebody else's sweat and make everyone THINK | | that yours will be NEW AND IMPROVED. | | I don't think the quote of firm (a) price, (b) performance (if I get | to measure it) and (c) delivery date is a problem. What used to happen | is that IBM and others would say "we have a great new system coming out | in January which will really beat what's on the market." With not | details there was a lot of wait and see. Bill, your points are good...but note that the article which started this off (in _EE_Times_) contained only a vague speculation about price, no real performance information (no clock or cycle times, no benchmarks), and a delivery date given only as "early 1990". I'm more critical of _EE_Times_ than IBM; it's _EE_Times_ that's conclu- ding, on the basis of a few tiny shreds of information, that this putative new machine "propels IBM to the head of the pack in computer architectures." But it does seem that what little IBM has said sounds a lot like Bill's definition for "wait and see." -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...No DOS. UNIX.
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (10/19/89)
In article <1989Oct19.023316.7433@ico.isc.com>, rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: | Bill, your points are good...but note that the article which started this | off (in _EE_Times_) contained only a vague speculation about price, no real | performance information (no clock or cycle times, no benchmarks), and a | delivery date given only as "early 1990". Here is the information I was quoting, I note that delivery information is not mentioned, but price performance is. I didn't see _EE_Times_ but I believe that they gave little info. }For example, I was recently down to IBM's Advanced Workstation }Division Austin center for a full briefing about the new IBM RISC }line. I've seen and touched the boxes; I've heard concrete }architecture, price and performance information. I definitely have }enough information to make a wait/buy decision. (No comment on the }decision; I'm under non-disclosure :) It's a pain to try and find a middle ground between surprise anouncements and vaporware. I wouldn't base any decision on what I read in those papers, other than to look into the product myself. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
preston@titan.rice.edu (Preston Briggs) (10/20/89)
In article <1260@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <1989Oct19.023316.7433@ico.isc.com>, rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: >}architecture, price and performance information. I definitely have >}enough information to make a wait/buy decision. (No comment on the >}decision; I'm under non-disclosure :) >It's a pain to try and find a middle ground between surprise >anouncements and vaporware. I wouldn't base any decision on what I read >in those papers, other than to look into the product myself. If ibm thinks you're a valuable potential customer, they'll probably show you the machine and give you all the info you want -- all subject to non-disclosure. Seems like a good idea to me. Avoids suprise announcements and vaporware. Preston Briggs