X-no-Archive:yes
The irony in this ("Mentioning MPE would dilute our corporate message and
confuse the analysts
and our customers") can be found by rereading the quote that started this
business, being the quote from the Sun Solaris PR Manager:
Sun charges HP has blurred its stance by becoming a Windows 2000 vendor as
well as Unix. "There's the level of confusion they project. Some people
think they support Windows 2000 primarily," says Russell Castronovo, public
relations manager for Sun's Solaris.
The article at
http://www.individual.com/frames/story.shtml?story=c0720309.8zf is worth
rereading. The trade press makes such statements as:
In the 1980s, HP was the first company to decide that an operating system in
the public arena had long-term customer benefits and began moving its user
base to Unix.
and
IBM is still maintaining a broad product line with several proprietary
operating systems, such as VM, MVS and OS/400, that spread its resources.
Today, as companies move their businesses to the Internet, they are
interested basically in Unix, Windows NT/2000 and Linux, and not much else.
HP, which supports all three, may now be the best focused.
This is immediately followed by the Sun quote.
It's ironic to compare how the companies strategies are working for them.
Sun is not doing so very well with Solaris, and they claim that what Ann
Livermore called a "multi-operating system strategy" is somehow a bad thing.
HP has such a strategy, and is doing better than Sun. The trade press
suggests that IBM "maintaining a broad product line with several proprietary
operating systems... spread(s) its resources". And yet, they are number
one... Hmmm... Where's Waldo? What's wrong with this picture? I am more or
less surrounded by mainframers in my "team", good and bright people who use
"proprietary" products that are object oriented, work with Java, JDBC, ODBC,
SQL, XML, and run high-end secure web servers...
While HP must chart its own course, I think we all want them to notice what
IBM is doing, and see that supporting a strong but "proprietary" offering
causes no loss of focus, and can't hurt the bottom line. I don't feel
confused by HP offering HP-UX, W2K, and Linux, any more than I am confused
by HP selling LaserJets, Vectras and Jornados. I can even choose to ignore
those other offerings if they hold no interest to me.
Castronovo said, "Some people think they support Windows 2000 primarily". I
would like to think that HP supports its customers, primarily. I would like
HP's customers to think that HP supports their business, primarily. All of
us. There's your focus.
Greg Stigers
http://www.cgiusa.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Scott [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 7:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Publicizing the e3000; Why Carly?
Well, I think I can guess what they would say.
"Mentioning MPE would dilute our corporate message and confuse the analysts
and our customers".
Or something pretty darn close to that.
G.
|
