COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	@center(Comments for Fenaughty on OA Systems)
C00009 ENDMK
C⊗;
@center(Comments for Fenaughty on OA Systems)


1. Their estimate of the market for office automation systems
seems plausible.

2. I am dubious about the advantages of combining voice and
written communication into the same system, except that the
telephone, including PBX, can serve both.  As long as there
isn't a good automatic way of transferring information between
the two, there is little advantage in a combined offering.  The
disadvantage is that the combined system has a lower probability
of being cost-effective in both areas for a given company at a
given time.

3. There is no special reason why PCs should offer only limited
word processing, and maybe it's not even true that they do.
Their stand-alone character is more serious.  A company needs
an integrated file system that everyone can refer to from his
own work station, whether this work station be PC or terminal.
The sophistication of the keyboards, displays and editor programs
of PCs can increase with time and the effort that the PC vendors
and their software suppliers put into competing in this area.

4. "Only a powerful, multi-tasking operating system designed from
the ground up for use on a microprocessor based system, combinded
with a layered approach to communications protocols will provide
the functionality, ease, and transparency required of tomorrow's
workstations."  This seems rather full of jargon.

5. I cannot agree with their argument that documents should be
filed conventionally after a few days.  I keep all my stuff, and
the cost is moderate at today's disk prices.  OA seems to be
proposing to build yesterday's system for tomorrow, since optical
disks promise to be even cheaper than magnetic disks.  Magnetic
disks are probably already as cheap as file cabinets and the
associated floor space.

	Here's the computation.  A file drawer in my home office
contains approximately 3000 pages (much space is taken up by
the folders).  Each page contains approximately 1,000 characters,
so the drawer contains 3 megabytes and the cabinet 12 megabytes.
Of course, it could contain considerably more, but convenient
access requires that many pages be short and that many file
folders contain only a few pages.  In any case, the space occupied
by a file cabinet can contain a disk system of about a gigabyte, i.e.
100 times as much storage.  Thus the space occupied by disk storage
is negligible compared to that occupied by paper storage.  The cost
of a file cabinet is about $150, but considering that office space
costs $100 per square foot these days, and a file cabinet with access
room occupies about 10 square feet, we get $1100 for the file cabinet.
100 file cabinets come to $110,000, but a gigabyte of disk storage
is only about $30,000.

	All the above numbers come from memory and crude estimations,
and a more accurate computation should be done.  However, I believe
then conclusion is correct, and with optical disks the discrepancy
will be larger.  Moreover, if it is decided that some files should
be kept on-line and others in paper files, we have the problem of
defining and enforcing the rules that determine which is which, as
well as the labor of printing and filing the documents.

6. System backup on floppies has proved a losing idea even for
microcomputers because floppies aren't reliable.  For this reason
all the more expensive micros include hard disk.

7. Using the ordinary phone system for electronic mail is the right
way to go.  They have made the right decision here.

8. Many PC systems have the equivalent of their ROLLCALL.  Our
computer can automatically dial numbers taken from a file, but
we only use our dial-out for making computer connections.  Their
idea of also using it for ordinary phone calls is good.

9. The "executive window" is skimpy and demands executives with
good eyesight.

10. We have the facility for secretaries to interrupt by computer
messages, but I don't believe it is used.  Perhaps we haven't
made it convenient enough.

	While there are some good ideas here, I don't think their
product will be successful or that III should buy into it.