Wirt started a new variant while I was out in the woods for the
weekend.... I am trying to limit myself to one reply per day on
all the "Owl variant" threads; so here's mine for this evening:
Wirt said:
> Because of a number of private communications that have
> come my way, I now fairly strongly feel that we should
> suspend the fund raising campaign for the WSJ ad. It is my
> strong impression that Winston has and will continue to talk
> to Ann and Carly about a much greater exposure of MPE
> and the HP3000, not only to the outside world, but within all
> of the various divisions of HP itself. ...........
> .......
> In just four days, we have been able to raise nearly 30% of
> the targetted goal. If everyone agrees that HP should be given
> the chance to demonstrate their committment to MPE, then I
> believe that the money collected so far should be returned to
> the various contributors.
I respectfully but pretty strongly disagree with my friend Wirt:
IMO we should NOT go into immediate retreat and return the $$
yet; and in fact I am of the opinion that at the very least we
should continue to try and collect enough $$ to buy space for a
[ "nice confrontational" item | open_letter | whatever ]
in the WSJ. If HP Corporate pleasantly surprises us with the
attention they lavish on the 3000 at HPW & in some noticeable
percentage of Corporate pronouncements to the trade rags,
then let's talk about giving the money back.. The interest people
will lose by letting their $$ stay in Wirt's special bank account
for a couple months or so is way down in the noise...
I see the current situation as akin to being at "Camp I" while
climbing Mt. Everest: The weather is unsettled; maybe it will be
a while until we get to "Camp II". But as long as we have food
and fuel for our camp stoves at "Camp I", we do not want to
waste all the energy it has already taken to get to this point; by
going all the way back down to Base Camp and then very
possibly having to slog all the way back up to "Camp I" again...
Money talks: Right now we have a good start on showing Carly
& Co. the money if necessary... We're more-or-less stable at
"Camp I".... This is not the time to wimp out and backpedal...
and remember: Someone had to process all the contributions;
and will have to disburse all the funds if the money is returned
now.... and could very fairly be a bit more reluctant to start the
process all over again from ground zero a second time....
> It is my strong impression that we've done some good already,
> but that now we need to let HP show us their resolve. And if
> it's not there, we can do this again in a very short while.
I agree we may have done some good already... who knows;
we may have helped Winston do a lot of good..... BUT: As
Steve Dirickson said:
> I absolutely disagree. Our problem has never been with
> people at Winston's level; .....
I think CSY is trying hard to do it's best; both technically
and "politically"; given the resources they have to work with....
> ... the people who *are* the (indirect) target of the campaign
> have a solid, years-long history of less-than-benign neglect.
> ......
> we have no commitment from anyone at HP to undertake any
> effort, other than the same people who have made the same
> commitment in the past--and had zero success.
I absolutely believe Winston is going to give it his best shot.....
I'm cheering for his success... and he may pull it off (the first
acid test will be HPW)... but the reality is that SO FAR Steve's
last above is the current cold, hard truth as far as we know it;
for anyone ABOVE Winston: "HP has three strategic OS, and
MPE *ain't* one of them" is STILL the official, released-to-
the-trade-rags Corporate party line.... That MAY change in
the near future... but we're not back to the future yet (maybe
I'm getting cynical in my old age, but there you have it.....).
Then Mark Wonsil:
> I still think the t-shirt and the owl campaign should move
> forward. Some pre-exposure to the "Who Knew?" concept
> would only make our statement stronger down the road.
Regardless of whatever else happens, I think Mark's above is
a good plan: The "Flight of the Owl" can be benign or
aggressive (from the point of view of the lemmings), depending
on whether or not the Owl has had a good meal recently....
... and remember what happened with the potentially "divisive"
"Proposition 3000" effort back at IPROF-96: I saw quite a few
HP employees wearing "Prop 3000" buttons at HPW-96.... ;-)
Besides agreeing with my above, Neil Harvey suggested options:
> a) have their funds returned intact
> b) partially fund development of some worthy enhancement
> c) establish an award for contribution towards MPE longevity
All good thoughts.... more reasons NOT to panic and rush back
down to Base Camp....
Jeff Kell (who has the sound of years of experience talking):
> While I am all for believing that things will change, and I have
> the utmost faith in Winston for his support (and fully well
> believe that he is at least as frustrated as us),
ditto; at the risk of boring repetition: CSY is NOT the crux of
the problem here; they're the good guys (gender neutral)...
> .... one point remains. If we back off now, we give them
> another year to essentially continue the status quo before
> making any waves. The timing opportunity of MPE being
> slighted in recent statements by Carly and Ann, and the
> proximity of HPWorld will not present themselves again for
> some time (we hope, but nevertheless they exist now).
Precisely..... That is why HPW is "acid test # 1"; public
pronouncements to the trade rags, et. al. is "acid test # 2"...
> In the worst-case scenario for the ad, suppose we run it and
> Carly makes a strong pro-e3000 statement in her address to
> HPWorld. In a similar worst-case scenario to not run the ad,
> suppose we refrain from the ad and Carly makes another
> "NT, HPUX, and Linux" statement.
After my somewhat "to the barricades" attitude above, y'all may
be slightly surprised that while I favor "continued collection", I
have concluded that holding off actually running the ad until
*after* HPW may be the best course after all: If Winston can
carry the day with HP Corporate for HPW, they will pass "acid
test # 1"; i.e.: I fully expect Carly and Ann will hear something
to the effect of: "If there is no clear message at the highest
levels on MPE at HPW, you should expect that there WILL BE
a clear message from users of the HP 3000 in the WSJ shortly
thereafter"... you can call that blackmail if you want (I can live
with the guilt); I prefer to call it "incentive to do the right thing"..
:-) ... plus there is another purely logistical consideration: It
is my understanding that a standard "pick your day" ad in the
WSJ requires a 10 day lead time (I assume that is 10 business
days).... and remember the Labor Day weekend is soon upon
us; i.e.: to get any professionally done full-page whatever into
the WSJ *before* HP World would *really* be tight; I question
whether that is doable even if we had 100 percent of the $$
right now (we don't).
SIDEBAR: Note I am actually willing to make a small bet that
Carly and Ann will make some positive specific mention of the
3000 at HPW; "how much" is the hanging question..... If
*neither* of them mention MPE and IMAGE at all, I will be
*big time* disappointed.... but I don't expect that last outcome.
Anyway, if HPW goes well, then we can probably wait another
"decent interval" (which I will not try to define tonight) for hard
evidence that Carly & Co will step up to the plate for "acid test
# 2".... but in order to be credible on all that, IMO we really
need to have the money: Loaded, locked, and ready to rock
with the WSJ....
Then Gavin:
> When considering the content of an ad, we should remember
> that in addition to the in-print impact of the ad on readers of
> the publication that it's in, we also need to think about how it
> will look when tacked up on a data center wall, or reprinted as
> a poster above the IT manager's desk.
If anybody thinks that's another "down in the noise" thing: Don't.
... never underestimate the power of a full-page ad in the WSJ
tacked up on the wall when the CEO wanders by the data
center....
> This may or may not suggest that a more complex ad / letter
> would be better.
At least for tonight, Gavin has me convinced: *Slightly* more
complex is better (but not to the point of being cluttered).
Wirt again:
> I am beginning to lean more and more to the idea of a well-
> written open letter. These letters are not uncommon in the
> WSJ or The New York Times when other groups have wanted
> to express their grievances.
I'm torn; between Gavin's above and Wirt's last above; they
are both good ideas; but would pretty much seem to be
mutually exclusive...
John Burke:
> I'm in favor of whatever will make the greatest impact. And I
> am afraid that if we let HPWorld slip by without doing
> anything, we lose our best opportunity until next year.
It's Carly and Ann that *definitely* need to step up to the plate
at HPW; or something goes in the WSJ....
> I believe Winston Prather will do everything he says, but I
> do not think that will be enough.
Believe it or not, I'm actually not discounting Winston's chances
(with our "help" in the background... ;-) ).... But I propose a
variation of Ronald Reagan's famous reply to Gorbachev ("Trust
but verify"): Hope for the best, but keep our powder ($$) dry...
Cortlandt had one concrete suggestion that would go a LONG
way towards meeting my "acid test # 2":
> ...... it occurred to me that a open letter from Carly in which
> she puts a stake in the ground regarding HP's specific
> commitments to MPE/iX would be very helpful. The
> announcement of another 5 year platform plan would be great.
Yup: Just ONE letter done right from Carly or even Ann that
would be released to the media. That (along with doing the
"right thing" at HPW) might go most of the way toward resolving
this whole issue... The fact that doing so is so easy IF THEY
WANT TO DO IT is one of the things that will make NOT doing it
so bad....
Then I'm glad to see Wirt "come around": ;-)
> However, that doesn't preclude continuing to collect money.
Wirt continued:
> I can see three outcomes. One is an outright failure. In that
> case, you get your money back ...... but you may have lost a
> great deal more.
>
> The second is that we succeed, ...... you again get your
> money back.
>
> The third is that the concensus of the group is that HP has
> clearly not been responsive and the ad must run. In that
> case, your money has become an investment in your future --
> and may well be the cheapest and best money you've ever
> spent.
I certainly considered my contribution an investment in my
future: If I have any technical IT professional life after retiring
from this job, it's probably the 3000 or nothing...
And while the above reminds me: I expect Wirt will not mention
this, so I will: While all contributions help build the total, please
keep in mind that Wirt & Co. and Ted have to receive, process,
and account for everything that comes in and goes out. While I
expect they are set up to receive and if necessary re-distribute
either bankcard or check contributions about as efficiently as
possible, down at the low end the benefit - cost ratio (i.e.: cost
in time to be "the bank") gets pretty small or even negative.
Therefore speaking *JUST FOR MYSELF*, for those who might
still consider contributing I will have the nerve to try and gently
suggest that it would be nice if at all possible to do so at the
$100 or above level; for the obvious reasons: Getting $25K in
$25 chunks means receiving that amount *and* then (potentially)
distributing *1000* checks.... That's non-trivial no matter how
you cut it.. and perhaps even more importantly, we ain't gonna
get to $150K or close to it at $25 or even $50 a pop.... Please
note that I really do NOT mean to offend anyone by saying this;
just noting some practical facts... :-)
Finally.... I'm going to respectfully play the heavy on two more
thoughtful responses; from Donna and Ted; i.e.: I have to
disagree; and pretty strongly at that: :-)
> i understand 'our' frustration but i just don't think that taking
> out an ad is the right thing to do. i really do think there would
> be a downside.
> Donna, thank you for saying so.
>
> ..... I'm still somewhat torn about it because I want to see
> MPE receive the attention it deserves, but I think that above
> all I would like HP to know us as friends. I'm afraid that the
> Confrontational approach is going to leave us positioned like
> the frustrated wife, yelling at her husband, "How come you
> don't love me any more?" ......
The straight answer to any and all "downside" concerns is:
Yeah: There's always some risk of having a net effect opposite
from that which was intended (help CSY). However, I think:
(1) If carefully done, for pretty much any of the WSJ variants
that have been bandied about the downside risk is minimal.
(2) A Keyport-local saying seems quite appropriate here:
"Remember: We are the customers; they are the vendors."
We're giving HP our money; our honest opinions should not
be considered unwelcome or "obtrusive". We certainly are not
out to insult or attack anyone (let's leave that to the politicians);
and HP should not be "miffed" at getting honest feedback from
customers... if that feedback ends up being something less
than completely "comfortable".... well, sometimes that's life...
(3) There is always an endless supply of squeaky wheels
demanding attention from senior executives. "Outside" wheels
that are totally silent in public may never make it to the "on
deck" slot ("inside" wheels are just not the same).
(4) Fundamentally we should base our actions if any on what
HP as a corporate entity *has done* and *is doing*; not on
what we hope they *might do*. As my former colleague Steve
Dirickson said so well, we have ZERO evidence of any positive
movement outside of CSY *so far*.
(5) This is a time for "tough love": Make it clear that we expect
HP senior management to stand and deliver at HPW and
thereafter. Either Winston will be successful or he won't. If he
isn't, if we then meekly do NOTHING after HPW, we are to some
extent consenting to remain in a one-sided relationship; where
it is hard not to see that somewhere down the road there will be
an unhappy end point... sorry, but I really think that's what it
comes down to: In the end a consistent "MPE is NOT strategic"
message from the highest level of HP overrides any and all other
good things at lower levels. That HAS to change or we're toast
in the long run.
> ..... i'm surprised that no one has mentioned asking csy if
> there is anything we could *collaboratively* do to help promote
> mpe.
Actually, in the last couple years I think there have been and
are quite a few examples of users / vendors working effectively
with CSY to promote / enhance the platform. The problem is
that's not where the problem is; it's way above that level.....
*more* than enough "fun" for today.... Like somebody said:
*This* is not what we need to be doing....
Ken Sletten
|
