NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/comp/unix/sysv386/12283

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-22 | 4.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!fuug!demos!kiae!glas!demos!crd.ge.co!ariel.crd.GE.COM!davidsen
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Date: 18 Jul 92 00:48 MDT
Subject: Re: Does Dell really want UNIX VARs?
Sender: Notesfile to Usenet Gateway <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Nf-ID: #R:[e-mail]:1644206933:[e-mail]:-1840711961:001:3532
Nf-From: ariel.crd.GE.COM!davidsen    Jul 18 00:48:00 1992
Lines: 71


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Evan Leibovitch) writes:

|> The VAR agreement offers resellers a whopping 4% for the sales resources
|> necessary to move that hundred grand -- a whopping $4,000 for the effort.
|> The VAR certainly couldn't count on referrals from Dell, which never came.

    [ ... ]

|> Well, maybe Dell doesn't value a company like this, but others do. We've
|> worked out an agreement by which they'll be putting ESIX on those 30 or
|> so boxes they'll move in the next year. They won't even consider Dell
|> for anything in the future, as much because of the way they were treated
|> than any rational factors. It's a big market out there, and there are
|> plenty of options out there.

  I've been involved with a system house like that, and I agree that
most vendors don't support them, because they don't make the vendor much
money.

                              * However *

  Even if you pay full list for Dell V.4 you are losing a tiny profit.
If you save one service call or have one customer saying nicer things
about your overall product, then using Dell has saved you money. I tell
people to order it direct on small systems, because even if I got the 4%
(I don't) it isn't worth filling out the paperwork for that price. On
the other hand, I like to include it with a system, because I'm a lot
more confident that the cistomer won't be bad mouthing me.

  Nothing against ESIX, I haven't dealt with them enough to know if they
have a good product or not, but they certainly seem to have a lot fewer
pieces in the product, and sometimes bells and whistles are the
difference between a happy customer and a delighted customer.
|>
|> To Dell, small potatos, I guess. But tell me, folks, was keeping that
|> damned 4% to yourselves so important that you'd just blow off a guy
|> that did low, but reliable, sales for you and provided you with another
|> window into a world where clients have never heard of you before?

  Putting the shoe on the other foot, was that 4% important enough to
you to justify changing vendors?

|> Dell is in the awkward position of having one of the best UNIX products
|> on the market, but the absolute worst VAR programme. Geez, even Conseneys
|> beats Dell in this category.
|>
|> It's not too late to fix things, guys, but Dell's UNIX marketing plans
|> need a *major* overhaul unless it wants to be just another brillaint
|> piece of work which the marketers will let whither.

  I have to agree. Dell has a major profit center here, and management
*seems* to think it's a way to sell more hardware, not important in
itself. The idea that Dell is also going to offer Solaris bothers me,
too. Unless the price structure is very different that what people have
been predicting, there is still a need for real UNIX. Maybe Destiny will
be the answer, but I wouldn't bet on that, either.

  If Dell were to spin off their V.4 group as a separate company I would
buy stock. I think they have a great bunch of people who are truly
concerned with putting out a functional and reliable product.

  Note that this is my personal opinion, and I still recommend other
vendors over Dell for some particular problems. I have no illusions that
any vendor has the best product for all situations.
--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
    It never ceases to amaze me that otherwise rational people, able to
    understand calculus, compound interest, and the income tax form, can
    continue to believe that poker is a game of chance.