Full text of "Interactive Computing newsletters"

See other formats

U/A '7 T

PRESS

REVIEW

The following articles are reprinted solely as items of interest for the independent evaluation by members of The Association of Time-Sharing Users and The
Association of Small Computer Users. The opinions, statements of fact, and conclusions expressed herein are not those of either Association.

Desktop Computer, Mini

Differ Widely

easy to use, especially for individual users.

Desktop computer buyers can easily link
programs from cartridges, large disks or
floppy disks, edit easily and quickly from
their keyboards and execute individual pro¬
grams in memory with the ability to inter¬
rupt and branch to service routines.

Minicomputers, by contrast, are optimized
for flexibility, speed, power and multipro¬
gramming, Bode said. Users of this equip¬
ment class can execute many programs con¬
currently in main memory and swap many
others automatically from disks.

With the resulting increase in operating
system complexity, users can maximize
hardware and software performance if they
have the expertise and inclination to do so.

i ' UCT
CHARACTERISTICS

DESKTOP

c vff§

Immediate

Multiterminal Capability

Languages

Interpretive; Requires

No Compiling

Multilanguage Capability
Requires Compiling

Integrated Package

Usually Packaged

As Stand-Alone System

Can Accommodate
Added Memory and
Peripherals

Can Expand to Multiproc¬
essor Network

Using Same Software

Unable to Serve
as CPU in Multiproc¬
essor Networks

Can Control
Distributed Network

Op®

Program Editing Con¬
trolled By Firmware

Software Modules
Developed by
Executive Packages

Requires Little
Training to Program
And Operate

Requires Systems
Manager With
Specialized Training

Contrary to popular user opinion, many basic differences in product characteristics separate
desktop computers and minis.

By Jeffry Beeler

CW Staff

PHILADELPHIA — Much confusion has
arisen recently about the distinction between
desktop computers and minis, but many
basic differences separate the two classes of
equipment, according to Fred Bode, market¬
ing manager of Hewlett-Packard Co/s Cal¬
culator Products Division.

Although both desktop computers and
minis use basically the same technology,
they take very different approaches to op¬
timizing that technology, Bode explained
during a seminar at a recent conference here.
They also serve fundamentally different
types of users, he noted, although their ap¬
plications do not differ substantially.

Focusing primarily on scientific and tech¬
nical applications, Bode said desktop com¬
puters are optimized to be "friendly" and

the marketing manager said.

Differences in Users

Because of the differences in how the two
CPU classes optimize their technology,
desktop computers primarily suit "profes¬
sional noncomputer users," whereas minis
mainly serve DP experts, Bode explained. In
the former category, he included users like
"scientists, engineers or business people
who are experts in their professions [but
who] do not necesarily want to become com¬
puter sophisticates."

In the latter category, he included users
who "are experts at what they do but [who]
in general have developed expertise in the
use of computers as well. Such users de¬
mand flexible and expandable systems be¬
cause they attack a much wider range of
computing problems than users with little or
no DP background, he said.

Bode partly attributed the frequent failure
to understand the differences between
desktop computers and minis to converging
product trends. As desktop computers and
minis have grown more alike in perform¬
ance, cost and size, the line separating the
two equipment classes has become increas¬
ingly blurred, he explained.

Bode also blamed the confusion on the ori¬
gin of desktop computers. Most of the cur¬
rent leaders in that product market —
Hewlett-Packard, Wang Laboratories, Inc.

and Tektronix, Inc. — began as programma¬
ble calculator manufacturers.

As a result, "many people still regard
[desktop computers] as calculators with
considerably less power and capability than

minicomputers."

Elsewhere in his address,
Bode further contrasted desk¬
top computers and minis by
noting how they differ in the
following product characteris¬
tics:

• Keyboard access. Desktop
computers provide immediate
or "live" keyboard access that
allows users to perform many
operations while running pro¬
grams.

Minicomputers, on the other
hand, provide a multiterminal
capability that allows concur¬
rent program development
and multistation operation in
conversational or batch mode,
Bode said.

• Languages. Most desktop
computers use an interpreta¬
tive language like Basic and
APL, which users can run
without compilation: Lan¬
guage selection depends on
the firmware users specify
when they buy their systems.

Minicomputers, by contrast,
usually use Fortran, Cobol
and other languages that re¬
quire compiling. The language
that mini users select is deter¬
mined by the software they
obtain for their systems. Bode
explained.

• Packaging. Desktop com¬
puters usually come in an in¬
tegrated package incorporat¬
ing all the peripherals that
constitute a typical system,
whereas minis are often con¬
figured as stand-alone units
without peripherals, the HP
executive noted.

• Upward compatibility.
With desktop computers, this
usually means "transportabil¬
ity of data and programs to
larger machines via either data
communications or some stor¬
age media like tapes, floppies
and hard disks." Bode said.

With minicomputers, the
concept means users applying

the same set of software, can
grow from a processor with a
small memory base to a very
large multiprocessor, multi¬
disk system.

• Distributive systems. Al¬
though most desktop com¬
puters are compatible with
and can report the results of
their local processing to larger
CPUs, they cannot serve as
central processors in multi¬
processor networks. Bode
pointed out.

Late model minicomputers,
however, usually come with
operating systems that allow
the machines to control dis¬
tributed processing networks.

• Operating systems. Desk--
top computers usually provide
firmware-controlled editing
capabilities that facilitate pro¬
gram development.

With most minis, on the
other hand, users develop
their software with the help of
"very powerful" operating
systems. Bode said. These ex¬
ecutive packages permit the
configuration of software
modules like file managers,
editors and device drivers.

• Operating personnel. Be¬
sides requiring little formal
training to operate and pro¬
gram, desktop computers per¬
mit easy access and can be eas¬
ily modified to suit custom ap¬
plications. With minis, by
contrast, users require DP
managers with specialized
training to configure hard¬
ware/software systems and to
coordinate the activities of
their computer operators.
Bode said.

Reprinted with permission, COMPUTERWORLD, May 8, 1978,
©Copyright CW Communications inc., Newton, MA 02160

Take Vendor Claims With Salt,
Microdata Executive Advises

By Jeffry Beeler

CW Staff

PHILADELPHIA — Consultants and other
disinterested parties have long warned users
to challenge minicomputer makers' glowing
sales claims, but now the advice comes from
one of the vendors — and in unusually hard-
nosed language.

"Be an extremely tough negotiator when
you're in the market for a system, and make
sure you get your vendor's key guarantees
in writing," Jack Bertch, Microdata Corp.'s
vice-president, warned prospective mini¬
computer owners at a recent seminar.

Although the DP industry is slowly shed¬
ding its reputation for unreliability and in¬
adequate service, "caveat emptor still applies
to hardware acquisition, and it will never
disappear completely," Bertch said.

Outlining some pointers first-time users
should keep in mind when selecting a mini¬
computer system, Bertch stressed the impor¬
tance of not underestimating installation
costs. "Estimate the total amount you will
have to pay for your new system, then dou¬
ble the figure because no matter how care¬
fully you try to predict your expenses, un¬
anticipated costs will invariably arise," he
said.

In choosing a prospective hardware sup¬
plier, users should list every capability they
expect from a reliable vendor and then rate
the available candidates in each performance
category, Bertch recommended. Some of the
selection criteria most frequently mentioned
by companies that have already installed
minicomputer systems include operating
system software, vendor reputation, system
reliability, price and field maintenance.

After rating each of the potential suppliers,
users should compare their findings with the
evaluations of current minicomputer users,
Bertch continued.

Consultants can also prove an "ii
valuable" aid to first-time users, not
just in selecting the right hardware
vendor, but also in defining the users'
needs and generating systems specifi¬
cations, Bertch said. He advised pro¬
spective buyers to rely heavily on their
consultants. "Drive your consultant
nuts," he urged. "In most cases, it
won't be such a long drive."

After a lengthy and thorough vendor
evaluation has narrowed the field of
potential hardware suppliers to a few
candidates, first timers should visit lo¬
cal minicomputer users in their respec¬
tive industries, Bertch recommended.
"But," he added, "you should not limit

yourself to the installations chosen by
the vendors because they will show
you only their most successful ac¬
counts."

Rather, users should choose for
themselves what sites they wish to
visit, either by calling companies listed
in the yellow pages of their local phone
directories or by contacting Interna¬
tional Data Corp. (IDC) in Waltham,
Mass. "For a small fee, IDC can make
available to you its prepared lists of
computer users in every major city in
the country," Bertch told his listeners.

If the final stage of vendor selection
ends in indecision about two dif¬
ferently priced systems — all other fac¬
tors being equal — users should pick
the more expensive configuration, pro¬
vided the difference in cost does not
exceed 15%, he asserted.

Before making the final vendor selec¬
tion, users should alsp prepare detailed
plans for emergency computer back¬
up, determine how often the hardware
suppliers will perform preventive
maintenance and how much it will
cost, uncover any hidden expenses and
find out if the vendors' software
would be transportable during sub¬
sequent systems upgrades, Bertch ad¬
vised.

"Very often, users acquire software
only to discover later they can't con¬
tinue to use the package when they ex¬
pand their configurations," he ex¬
plained.

After choosing a hardware supplier
and specifying a system, first-time
users should hire an attorney to review
the contract and make sure it does not
unduly favor the vendor. "In 90% of
the cases, the contract does favor the
vendor," the Microdata executive
warned.

Hardware From the Service Firms

National CSS offering a ‘megamini’ and others will resell DEC 2020s

Any doubts that the big computer service
firms intended to move aggressively into
the hardware market were eliminated last
month as a number of companies an¬
nounced plans to remarket DECsystem-
2020 computers and National css un¬
veiled plans to introduce a 370-compati¬
ble megamini called the 3200 series.

Automatic Data Processing, of Clifton,
N.J., launched a major program to offer
the 2020 to customers as an in-house
processor that would be linked to adp’s
time-sharing facilities. Tymshare, Inc., of
Cupertino, said it aims to move custom¬
ers from its shared DECsystem there to
their own machines without considerable
reprogramming and will do this with a
2020 sometime in the late spring.
Rapidata, CompuServ and Dataline Sys¬
tems Ltd. all plan to acquire DECsystem
2020s this spring and summer for the
same purpose.

And while these announcements rep¬
resent a major commitment to hardware
sales as an integral part of their time¬
sharing offerings, the ncss project is, in
scope, the most ambitious undertaking.

In effect ncss is gambling it can emu¬
late ibm’s sbs strategy—combining data
communications, hardware, distributed
processing, and software all into one

NCSS gambles that it can
emulate IBM’s strategy for
SBS—combine data
communications, hardware,
and distributed processing
in one package.

package—long before the giant computer
manufacturer ever gets sbs off the
ground.

$16 million system

Toward this end, ncss has spent $16
million developing a system that will
compete head-on with the largest dec,
Data General, Hewlett-Packard, Inter¬
data, and Prime offerings, and serve as a
370 replacement. Importantly, also, the
company intends to apply sometime this
summer to the Federal Communications
Commission for permission to compete
as a specialized communications carrier
providing a national packet-switched
network. That network is already opera¬
tional, and ncss only needs a green light

WEISSMAN AND MCGUIRE OF NCSS
A 370-compatible megamini
called the 3200 series

from the fcc to put it in business, com¬
pany president Robert Weissman says.

The introduction of the 3200 and its
commitment to the data communica¬
tions market represent significant steps
for ncss, which in fiscal 1978 (ncss’s
fiscal year ends Feb. 28th) has seen reve¬
nues jump more than 16% over last year’s
$41 million plus figure and pretax profits
increase about 34%. To accommodate
this growth and its new ventures, the
company has moved into new corporate
headquarters in Wilton, Conn. Concur¬
rently, its former headquarters in nearby
Norwalk have been converted to a base
for the firm’s newly formed computer
division—a group that will be headed up
by 34-year-old former iBMer James
McGuire, who previously took ncss’s
data base management system nomad
from ground zero to over $8 million in
sales.

Compact controllers

Unlike adp, which is buying dec hard¬
ware off the shelf then reselling it, ncss
has manufactured its own machine
through a subsidiary of U.S. Phillips
Trust. This approach is a definite plus in
the company’s favor, McGuire claims.
Specifically, by producing its own 370-
compatible megamini, ncss has, it

claims, improved on the original, design¬
ing the controllers to be far more com¬
pact than the 370 controllers. “This
makes the sytem less expensive and not
nearly as big,” says McGuire. “As a result
the customer can use it without the com¬
puter room environment needed for the
370.”

He adds the scaled down megamini is
particularly suited for a distributed pro¬
cessing environment, a market ncss
wants to penetrate. “The 3200 could also
be used as an extension of a saturated
370, if the 370 owner wants a second
machine dedicated to the new, dis¬
tributed applications for on-line program
development,” an ncss marketing paper
on the 3200 reads.

Additionally, the 32-bit machine,
which sells for about $200,000 fully con¬
figured and is in the 370/135 plus power
range, offers multiple language ca¬
pability, the ability to run all 370 applica¬
tions, simultaneous time-sharing, rje
and batch capabilities, and virtual mem¬
ory.

Microcode not a constraint

However, the system’s real selling
strength is ncss’s existing operational
and applications software, the company
believes. “With ibm the user has to accept
whatever ibm chooses to give him,” notes
Bob Weissman. “And if ibm decides to
change its software or the microencoding
embedded in the system, the user has to
scramble. But since we produce and
maintain our own software, that’s not a
constraint for us.”

Moreover, the lack of constraint may
provide ncss with an edge over some of
the pcm’s which are vulnerable to ibm’s
changes. And make no mistake about it,
ncss may be introducing a megamini but
its sights are set on a larger target. As’
Weissman points out, a customer who
needs 370/158 power to handle his peak
processing requirements once or twice a
month, can simply plug into the ncss
network. The 3200 coupled with the
packet-switched capability gives a cus¬
tomer the tools he needs to set up his own
distributed network, and ncss’s big 370s
and Amdahl machines provide him with
big system capabilities without the ac¬
companying overhead.

On paper the ncss strategy makes
sense. What will happen in the market¬
place is an altogether different question.

—Laton McCartney