Xref: utzoo comp.sys.apollo:5908 comp.sys.hp:5691 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!metro!news From: jimr@maths.su.oz.au (Jim Richardson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo,comp.sys.hp Subject: Netpower: Support via Internet (was: Apollo/HP contrast) Keywords: FTP email commercialism profit Message-ID: <1990Jul23.100007.2429@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> Date: 23 Jul 90 10:00:07 GMT References: <1990Jul14.085541.18550@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> <5570451@hpfcdc.HP.COM> <1990Jul18.102038.22220@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> <43111@apple.Apple.COM> <1990Jul19.071243.5012@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> <1002@limbo.Intuitive.Com> Sender: jimr@maths.su.oz.au (Jim Richardson) Reply-To: jimr@maths.su.oz.au (Jim Richardson) Organization: Dept of Pure Mathematics, University of Sydney Lines: 131 In article <5570451@hpfcdc.HP.COM> in comp.sys.hp, rer@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Rob Robason) writes: >These comments are absolutely my own and in no way reflect HP's >position: > >I think that the need to provide some sort of high speed link between >our support customers and our support organization is self evident. HP >has a long standing tradition of good support, and we are consistently >ranked in the highest eshelons in this regard. But we are not so naive >as to think that we need not improve to keep our leadership position, >nor that we do not have problems to iron out. As an Apollo customer, I feel that great improvements are urgently needed in many aspects of support. >... >I think a couple of non-trivial stumbling blocks stand in the way of >HP's use of the net for support purposes: > >1) The commercial (i.e. not for gain) use of the internet is > apparently forbidden. Without wishing to cast dispersion on any of > our competition, HP is not a company that will knowingly violate > this policy. Work to change, yes, but not violate. I addressed this in my posting <1990Jul18.102038.22220@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>, where I argued that the NSFNET acceptable use guidelines do *not* prohibit the kind of activities we are asking HP to undertake on the network. In particular, I said: ]In any case, the statement invites review by the NSFNET Project Office. Has ]HP made a submission to the Office for review? If so, could we be told what ]the Office said? Even if HP *has* asked in the past and failed, I suggest that ]a well structured *JOINT* submission from HP *and* interested US academic ]institutions could well be successful. I'd still like to hear what HP has done so far to "work to change", in Rob Robason's words. I'd also like to encourage people at US research or academic institutions, which have standing with NSFNET, to think about mounting a case to the Project Office. Those connected to other networks might think what steps they could take: I've made some enquiries myself about the Australian AARNET network which are quite encouraging. >... > While small companies may get away with basing their whole support > system on the net, when a company the size of HP steps in and does > the same, they draw a lot more attention and are more likely to > bring cries of foul-play from competitors, gateways and net purists. Without disrespect for the size of HP, I'd like to point out that Sun and Apple are not tiddlers either. Sun has an archive on uunet.uu.net. And as Jim Wright has pointed out, mjohnson@Apple.COM (Mark B. Johnson) recently announced in comp.sys.mac.misc that Apple will soon be making a wide range of system development software available on a new FTP archive. What we're asking for in an HP archive in Request 3 of the Open Letter to HP is considerably more modest! Dave Taylor has also noted in <1002@limbo.Intuitive.Com> that ) - Bug reports and defect reports can be sent via email to ) at least: Sun, DEC, MIPS and Apple... Does anyone know of other examples? >2) It doesn't take a genius or an insider to figure out that about 1/5 > to 1/4 of HP's computer revenues are from support contracts. For a > $12 billion company, that's not something you treat lightly. I'm > sure the folks in support are wrestling with how to provide these > services on a public network to a restricted set of potential users > (i.e. those who've purchased support contracts). It wouldn't make > sense to give away to some what you're charging others $2 Billion > for, you wouldn't sell many contracts on those terms. It should be possible to support paying customers by email on a public network, provided those customers are using the equipment being supported for purposes acceptable to the network. As far as a public archive is concerned, HP would be giving something away for free, I agree. But in the long term this could be beneficial to HP's profits rather than the opposite. Firstly, making information available by FTP to everyone on the net is much cheaper than distributing it by old-fashioned means. Secondly, if routine support questions, which hundreds of different customers might want to ask, can be answered by the customers themselves through reference to a public archive, HP support resources will be freed to process tricky non-routine questions more effectively. That should make life more interesting for support engineers, apart from anything else :-) Thirdly, an efficient and attractive support system available via Internet will be a big plus for HP in selling more machines. >3) There is an incredibly intricate support organization in place to > support HP's miriad products from countless divisions in multiple > business sectors. A major accomplishment has been the ability to > provide this support in a mostly consistent way to customers to hide > the fragmentation behind the scenes. ... "Hide"? Many Apollo customers at least are quite aware of this "fragmentation"! > ...A change such as support via a > public network would require significant coordination between lots > of HP entities, many of whom have very different goals. Such > coordination isn't easy even in small groups, and takes time to meet > everyones needs and fit everyones schedule. Sure, it's going to take a lot of work for HP. But if HP can't move rapidly to take advantage of the networking technology that Dave Taylor has called "the wave of the future", then there are other companies who will. >... >As an aside, I wouldn't hold my breath for any free support though, I >don't think that's in the future. Any network patch system you see, >you'll only see if you pay for it. See above. We pay for support contracts to get major software upgrades, and certainly expect to continue to do so. It may require some changes in corporate culture, but I don't see why a responsible company, proud of its reputation for fine products -- as HP justifiably is -- should not be willing to make incremental patches publicly available when there do turn out to be blemishes in its software. >Rob "My $2 Billion worth" Robason -- Jim Richardson Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia Internet: jimr@maths.su.oz.au ACSNET: jimr@maths.su.oz FAX: +61 2 692 4534 -- Open Letter: The final version has been delayed a little, but should be ready by early next week if not sooner. There is a volunteer to collect signatures in Europe (thanks, Colin!); another for North America would be much appreciated.