[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       novell
Subject:    Re: The "One-NOS Advantage" Argument -- How to Counter?
From:       "Eric D. Pierce" <PierceED () CSUS ! EDU>
Date:       2000-04-28 22:47:24
[Download RAW message or body]

On 28 Apr 2000, at 9:38, Randolf Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM> wrote:
[via NOVELL@LSV.SYR.EDU]

Date sent:              Fri, 28 Apr 2000 09:38:49 +0000
From:                   Randolf Richardson <randy@INTER-CORPORATE.COM>
Subject:                Re: The "One-NOS Advantage" Argument -- How to Counter?

>
>         It's all about insight, and salespeople tend to be very good at
> using limited knowledge to their advantage because they can usually
> present better than technical folks -- after all, they specialize in
> this, and they don't specialize in managing the network at your
> company the way you do.


With all due respect, I'm going to play deveil's advocate a bit (at
least to stimulate discussion about the tech community taking
responsibility for what has happened in the entire industry).

Not apologising for slimy sales people, but in terms of how they are
perceived by non-tech decision makers:

Does anyone remember all those studies 10 years ago that showed that
generally IT (mainframes, etc) was doing a terrible job returning the
investment that organizations were putting into computers? Could
arrogance and too much navel gazing amongst some elements of the tech
community have had *anything* to do with it? Oh dear! Do users and
managers really forget that fast? I doubt it, and that is part of why
the purist techies aren't being "listened to" by the (evil) users now.

Also, Microsoft "popularized" computing (it's ugly, and breaks a lot,
but cheap), and the purists in the tech community community have
hated them for it ever since. I have found it ironic that the purists
amongst the tech elites could have done exactly the same thing as
Microsoft did, but a lot better (remember the horrid, early, failed
attempts MS had with networking?), *IF* they had been willing to
lower their standards, and/or depart from their mid-and-high range
market focus.

ep


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]