Rash's Judgment: Can DEC Deliver Alternative to SAA ?
 
Microbytes Daily News Service
Copyright (c) 1989, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Last week Digital Equipment Corporation announced enhancements to
its All-In-1 office support software that make it clear that DEC
plans to use it as a base from which to challenge IBM's Systems
Applications Architecture (SAA). These changes, which involve
DEC's move to a server-based architecture instead of the
terminal-based systems that have been DEC's mainstay, are claimed
to offer the user a better deal. The question is, do they? And if
so, does it matter?
 
Digital Equipment Corporation has had an uneasy association with
personal computing since small machines were developed. The
company's forays into the desktop market have been largely
ill-conceived and abortive, and they have shown a lack of full
understanding of the personal computer market or the personal
computer user. That trend continues to this day.
 
The company's personal computer networking product is a clear
example of this lack of understanding. DECnet DOS is designed to
allow personal computers using Ethernet to use a VAX as a file
server. The problem is that DEC made the software on the PC side
so resource hungry that much personal computer software can't
coexist with it, and they made it so expensive ($700 per
workstation) that no one outside the DEC devoted is likely to buy
it.
 
This is, of course, the same networking product that DEC plans to
use to support its answer to SAA. Will the rest of DEC's software
be as poorly positioned as its DECnet DOS? At first look, it
would appear that DEC has moved past its problems understanding
the PC user and has emerged into the world of standards. The new
All-In-1, after all, is supposed to support standards. The
problem is, most of the standards that DEC plans to support are
its own, or those it supports already.
 
Still, there are important capabilities that DEC promises that
will be a benefit to personal computer users -- if DEC keeps its
promises. The first is that All-In-1 will be available for a
variety of platforms. The second is that it will support a
variety of workstation platforms and operating systems. Finally,
there's the promise that the new All-In-1 will use more open
standards than does IBM's SAA.
 
If these promises come to pass, there are some distinct
advantages to the user in a small business or small department in
a large corporation. Smaller users simply cannot afford the
investment IBM requires in mainframes for SAA to be used to its
fullest. DEC, on the other hand, makes a series of MicroVAX
computers that are no more expensive than the high-speed 80386
machines with which they compete. And while DEC software can be
expensive, versions for the smaller VAX systems will probably be
more reasonable. Finally, if Unix support really does
materialize, it will open up the concept of true departmental
computing far beyond what exists now.
 
The question is, of course, what DEC really intends to do, and
what it is capable of doing. So far, the company's track record
is not good, and similar to that of IBM. Both companies find the
desire to trap the customer in a maze of proprietary products
nearly irresistible. There's no hard evidence at this point that
the trap has been removed.
 
                              --- Wayne Rash
 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
