symbolics marketing strategy

["Leslie A. Walko" <attila@FLASH.BELLCORE.COM>]

>From:  TYSON@warbucks.ai.sri.com (Mabry Tyson)
>Newsgroups:     BCR.DIGEST.SLUG
>Message-ID:  <19389@bellcore.bellcore.com>

Please register my desire to PAY for CLIM, to have it as a layered
product.  As a matter of fact, I would prefer to pay for all Symbolics
software.

Some people suggest that CLIM, Statice, etc should be free.  I disagree
with free software.

Firstly, you cannot give software away for free for long and stay in
business.  Secondly, the industry as a whole has unbundled.  When you
buy hardware, you do not get a software environment from anyone other
than Symbolics. The cost of Symbolics hardware is very high because they
are subsidizing the cost of the software environment.  Therefore, the
software is not really free.

My suggestion is to drop the price of a 4MW, 760MB XL400 to say $35,000
and charge the same development license fee as for the UX400s.  They
should also port their layered products to SUNs.  This would allow people
to buy what they actually need.  And the price of the hardware would be
reasonable for delivery also.

Leslie Walko	attila@bellcore.com

*** alternate opinions begin here ***


>     Date: Thu, 25 Jan 90 11:50 EST
>     From: miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU (Brad Miller)
> 
>         Date: Thu, 25 Jan 90 08:08 CST
>         From: dmitchell@backus.trc.amoco.com (Donald H. Mitchell)
> 
> 	    Date: Wed, 24 Jan 90 09:15 PST
> 	    From: taylor@CHARON.arc.nasa.gov (will taylor)
> 
> 	    [...]
> 	    I propose that Symbolics bundle CLIM, Concordia, Statice, & Joshua into
> 	    Genera for NO increase in software purchase/maintenance costs to users.
> 	    Then agressively market these capabilities which would now be part of 
> 	    the basic Symbolics Genera operating system. 
> 	    [...]
> 
> 	    - Will Taylor         taylor@pluto.arc.nasa.gov
> 
>         I strongly second the idea that CLIM ought to be bundled (perhaps
>         eventually becoming THE interface). 

	[...]
> 
> When Symbolics indicated it was planning to have CLIM as a layered
> product, I responded (privately to Symbolics) that I thought it was a
> bad idea.  

	[...]

> I'm glad that a number of people have spoken up to say that layering CLIM
> is unwise.  I have made a suggestion to Symbolics as to how it would be
> better to finance it.  If anyone else would like to, I suggest you make
> your comments to SLUG-LIAISON@AI.SRI.COM and/or to your salesman.
>