Risc System/6000

[Arthur Stine]

>From article <1443 at ks.UUCP>, by drake at sd2.almaden.ibm.com (Sam Drake):
> In article <1990Mar9.015943.4351 at world.std.com> madd at world.std.com (jim frost) writes:
> 
>>Yep, but my sparcstation 1 worked right out of the box and hasn't
>>crashed yet.
> 
> Hey, that one's hardly fair ... if you have a 6000 at all, today, you 
> by definition have a pre-release, early-ship machine with pre-release,
> early-ship, not-done-by-definition software.  Complaining very publically
> because it's not as stable as another company's shipped production level
> system isn't exactly kosher...?
> 
Well, then why did IBM announce it sooo early, if they aren't prepared to
ship 'production' quality machines? Advice: if your product isn't ready
then don't announce it and ship some 'pre-release' machines and then turn
around and complain when users criticize it for not working right. It seems
like a typical IBM tactic to pre-annonounce their machines in order to try
to get some market share. Well, in the workstation market, I would predict that
if a customer is looking at some machines, and he looks at DEC, Sun, HP, and
IBM, the IBM wouldn't be the one he would pick right now because the
machines that he can actually get his hands on are 'flaky'. Making bold
promises like 'oh, it is a pre-release machine. it will be much better when
it is ready', don't really hold water. If your machine isn't ready to ship
NOW, then don't announce it. Data General did the same thing. The DG machine
machine I saw shortly after they brought them out was flaky. All the IBM
RS/6000's I've heard about are flaky. First impressions are VERY lasting 
impressions. If IBM wanted to make a big splash in the workstation
market, they should do it with something that floats once it hits, not 
something that sinks once it hits and has to be held up with a life preserver
until it can float...


-- 
Art Stine
Sr Network Engineer
Clarkson U
ABStine at CLVMS.Clarkson.Edu