Talk:Banyan Systems/Archives/2013

Enlarged the article on Banyan VINES

Writers sound pretty bitter with Banyan's legendarilly incompetent business leadership. While I didn't go into that, I greatly expanded the article on Banyan VINES. I was a Banyan engineer, myself for over 10 years. Anyone interested in an article on Banyan engineers? SimonATL (talk) 04:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The article states, "Banyan's NOS was built on AT&T's UNIX System V Release 3 (SVR3); however, the UNIX kernel was protected from access by anyone but Banyan personnel." However, later versions of Banyan Vines had a purchasable option to "Access UNIX" and there was a menu item for the same. Since I can't cite a source and I am working from memory, I have opted not to edit the page, but encourage someone with more personal or cite-able knowledge to do so. This article definitely seems to have POV problems as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.58.182 (talk) 05:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

NPOV/Article

This article has some really good and insightful information, although I have to say there are some subjective opinions offered that, while possibly correct (I don't know), definitely violate WP:NPOV. I think that the article runs pretty far afoul of WP:OR as well. In all, we need better sourcing, less sensationalist phrasing, and objectivity. Tags applied, I'll try to dig up some sources. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

[[ ========= Some data is correct in the article =========]]

Having been one of the first 12 employees that stayed with the company for over 8 years, there is a fair amount in the article that is accurate until it gets to the "marketing powerhouse" section. The sales and marketing organizations were referred to as a revolving door. Jim D was just one of the many that went through that door with essentially the same impact as his predecessors and followers.

I went searching online for some corporate history and the following is extremely accurate.

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Banyan-Systems-Inc-Company-History.html

or this article which is the same except for another list of references at the end.

http://www.answers.com/topic/banyan-systems-inc?cat=biz-fin

Banyan did deliver software and hardware that supported several large networks in the mid-80's such as connecting together 17,000 PC's at PG&E and being the complete networking solution for the RTC (Resolution Trust Corporation) when it was formed in the late 80's to sort out the S&L crisis. Continental Grain was indeed a longtime customer and used Banyan's chat feature to execute trades.

Bottom line, it was a leadership product that was still essentially proprietary when the market was being driven to open solutions. Saddled with the support and requirements of several very large customers, Banyan never had the resources or strategy to shift quickly enough to open standards. Banyan entered the hardware market out of necessity since in the early 80's, there were no Unix servers with a PC or AT bus that was needed to run off the shelf networking cards (of which there were about 5 different technologies then - Proteon, Ethernet, Arcnet, etc). The company was able to successfully transition out of the hardware server business in the late 80's as I386 servers were released that would run Unix well. The next logical transition was to transition to an open version of Unix on the IX86 architecture, so that the company could get out of the business of burning resources on writing (and qualifying) drivers for the network card-du-jour but I don't believe that it ever successfully did. That's around the time that I left.

Much of the company's growth in the late 80's and early 90's was disproportionately selling more product to its existing large customers rather than broadening its customer base.

My final comment is that it would be unfortunate to have this article removed from wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.216.16 (talk) 02:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep the Article

I found this article after I asked myself "whatever happened to Banyan". Vines was the first networking product I had used (late 80's). The first place I looked for an answer was in the WikiP. I think the article is well written and very informative. The article fits the bit of history that I remember. I understand if it does not meet all the guidelines, but the alternative is to possibly lose a bit of history. I would suggest leaving the objections to the article in place to flag its problems, but leave the article. H.E. Hall (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Please Revise, Or I'll Have To Do It

This article has been in dispute for the better part of 4 years. I certainly was happy to learn some of the history of a networking company that I cut my teeth on, but this article carries no sources and offers too many opinions. A Wikipedia article is "This company did this, then did this, then did this." Talk of the incompetence of the sales staff doesn't play into this. If sales declined, then reference sales figures that prove it. The author of this article should be able to find references to the rebranding - or sale - of a company. To put it in academic terms, you're writing about the events of World War II, not the underlying causes of it, or the sentiments of its participants. Rburriel (talk) 03:34, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:13, 14 June 2013 (UTC)