[Info-vax] Accuweather new contract

[David Froble]

Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> In article <a61e3181-aad4-46d0-90ca-1dc34ae94fec at googlegroups.com>,
> 	johnwallace4 at yahoo.co.uk writes:
>> On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 12:04:06 UTC, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> In article <00AF498C.D7F4B393 at sendspamhere.org>,
>>> 	VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:
>>>> In article <dc2f7dde-a75d-4cc9-8a50-93169732474c at googlegroups.com>, clairgrant71 at gmail.com writes:
>>>>> Accuweather is one of our Field test sites.
>>>> Well then, that might squelch the M$ conjectures. ;)
>>>>
>>> Not when the only public presence provided by Accuweather themselves
>>> says they are "Microsoft Cloud" and has no mention of VMS at all.
>>> The commercials I saw were all placed in programs where they are
>>> likely to be seen by the people with the buying power and corporate
>>> influence in places that VMS should be fighting for as customers.
>>> This isn't going to help.
>>>
>>> bill
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves
>>> billg999 at cs.scranton.edu |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
>>> University of Scranton   |
>>> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>
>> What's not going to help is the belief that any organisation shall
>> worship at one (and exactly one) IT altar.
>>
>> It is actually possible for an organisation to have more than one piece
>> of an IT strategy, and be happy with all of it. One size does not fit all.
>>
>> When the provider of the most expensive bit of the organisation's IT says
>> "there's (e.g.) 30% off next year if you let us use you as a reference site",
>> how many organisations will refuse?
>>
>> 30% off many organisation's Microsoft bill is a lot of pennies.
>>
>> 30% off many organisation's VMS bill is down in the noise.
> 
> And, while all of that is correct, what do you think the influence will
> be when the CIO of a major corporation is left with the choice of VMS
> or Microsoft Cloud?  Microsoft is already on all their desktops, just
> why should he even consider bringing VMS in?  One size does not always
> fit all, but the door is seldom open for the odd man out.  He has to
> fight harder to get in that door.  
> 
> bill
> 

Microsoft desktop apps do the jobs needed on the desktops.  VMS doesn't 
have the desktop apps.  It's reasonable to use what is needed for the 
job.  If a CIO doesn't understand that, I've got to wonder who hired the 
idiot.

But there are other needs, for which perhaps the desktop apps are not so 
well suited.  A decent CIO does understand this also.  For some of those 
needs, VMS is a viable solution.  A decent CIO can also understand this.

There are what we're calling desktop applications in just about every 
organization.  Always have been.  In the past they were manual, and then 
mechanical, and then users on a computer system, and then when PCs 
became available on individual desktop systems.  There was a huge 
unfulfilled need for what became desktop systems, and when such finally 
became available, that need far over shadowed other computer usage, and 
swept Microsoft to where it is today.

However, the desktop systems have never been capable of doing some of 
the other jobs for which computers have been used.  Some have attempted 
to do so.  Probably many still survive, but I'm aware of some that 
haven't survived their poor judgment.

Getting back to Accuweather.  They distribute weather information.  For 
many, that distribution is to desktop, notebook, tablet, and smart phone 
systems.  Probably the majority to smart phones today.  But unless 
they're just re-routing weather information provided by others, they 
might need some serious computing capability.  Probably not provided by 
a bunch of smart phones.