NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #19/NN_1992_19.iso/spool/vmsnet/mail/pmdf/2191

Internet Message Format | 1992-08-27 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!gatech!ukma!cs.widener.edu!iggy.GW.Vitalink.COM!pacbell.com!network.ucsd.edu!mvb.saic.com!unogate!beckman.com!dsroberts
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: Justifying PMDF maintenance costs
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 27 Aug 92 10:19:43 PDT
Organization: Beckman Instruments
Lines: 22

We've been using PMDF for a year now, and it's time to renew the contract.
There was a great deal of management resistance here to PMDF simply because the
maintenance cost more than the initial license, and management has been looking
for an excuse to get rid of it.  Mgmt was sold on the PMDF-MR capability, but
we have subsequently gotten rid of ALL-IN-1 and the need for PMDF-MR, so I am
in the painful position of having to justify PMDF all over again.  We'll dump
-mr, but I need justification to keep regular PMDF.  I've explained about
the flexible addressing, DELIVER, and personal aliases, but so far am
getting no budget.

My question for the list, how do you justify PMDF to your management when you
already have MultiNet's SMTP processing capabilities?  Do other managements
think personal aliases are enough, or is there more that I'm forgetting in
trying to justify continuing support for this product?  Has anyone put together
some justification documents for THEIR management?  Or maybe PMDF just isn't
necessary for us.
--
   Don Roberts                   Internet:  [e-mail]
   Beckman Instruments, Inc.     Phone:     [phone]
   2500 Harbor Bl. Mailstop X-12 FAX:       [phone]
   Fullerton, CA  92634          Disclaimer:  Blame me, not Beckman.
   People are as happy as they decide to be - A. Lincoln