steven@lakesys.UUCP (Steven Goodman) (06/16/88)
I am amazed -
Recently while obtaining source lisence from AT&T for
a 386 box I saw source code prices soar faster then ram prices.
We ordered ( from a var ) Unix 3.1 for the 386 and at
that time source for 3.0 was available, so assuming that I could
always "update" to 3.1 or better I went ahead. After waiting
and waiting for this to arrive, I called the people at AT&T to
see what happened to our code. Seems that not only is 3.1
avaialable now but 3.2 as well. So what the heck, might as well
get the lastest code right?
Seems as if AT&T no longer wants to sell to Universities,
seeing as their price scheduling has gotten "out of line" in my
opinion. To get 3.2 I am told I must first buy 3.0 then upgrade
to 3.1 and again to 3.2 (can't just say, "hey guys send me 3.2")
So $1200 buys me 3.0 - then $2400 upgrades me to 3.1 then ANOTHER
$2400 takes me to 3.2! So for $6000 I get the lastest code. If I
want binaries for a specific processor it's $400 bucks a pop per
upgrade.
While talking to this individual at AT&T he tells me that
Universities can expect to pay more and more and more for such code.
So apparently AT&T has desided that Universities are no longer
important to them (by the way this is Marquette University - Milwaukee
Wisconsin). This is AFTER AT&T desided that they would no longer
support a "discount" computer purchase program for student here.
From all of this I would guess we (Universities) are now
being thought of as no more then another source of income for AT&T.
Use to be shipped this stuff for little more then the cost of
producing the tapes and handling, I suppose with the AT&T system
it's quite possible that it now costs $6000 to ship a tape out.
I would really like a logical explaination of this madness.
We have delt with AT&T for many years and it seems recently a new
attitude is taking place. If someone from AT&T can answer this
please write:
Steven Goodman - System Administrator
Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science
Marquette University
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53233
It's bad enough that we have to pay more for this code,
but to remove pricing for students as well? I definately see
us doing less business with them in the future. In the past
local business people use to call and ask us about our experiences
with AT&T seeing as they were considering a machine and they felt
we are a good source of information for such data. This new
"attitude" AT&T has will certainly change my opinion - and my
advice to such businesses. Quite honestly, I am giving up on
AT&T. They are definately making efforts to make them the wrong
choice for us.
Anyone else find this pattern taking place? Does AT&T
seem less responsive to your needs? With all the machines we
have around we spend MULTIPLE FIGURES a year for support, for
that cost alone we should get this code for free not to mention
making available MINIMAL discounts for student purchases.
--
Steven M. Goodman
Lake Systems - Milwaukee, Wisconsin
{ihnp4,uwvax}!uwmcsd1!lakesys!steven
{rutgers,uunet}!marque!/ked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Earl H. Kinmonth) (06/16/88)
In article <745@lakesys.UUCP> steven@lakesys.UUCP (Steven Goodman) writes: > So apparently AT&T has desided that Universities are no longer > important to them (by the way this is Marquette University - Milwaukee > we are a good source of information for such data. This new > "attitude" AT&T has will certainly change my opinion - and my > advice to such businesses. Quite honestly, I am giving up on > AT&T. They are definately making efforts to make them the wrong > choice for us. > > Anyone else find this pattern taking place? Does AT&T > seem less responsive to your needs? With all the machines we I'm not sure ATT ever had any special feelings of goodwill to universities in general. It is more probable that the role of UNIX in the university environment was largely a corporate oversight encouraged by anti-trust considerations. SCO (Xenix) is starting to show a friendlier attitude toward universities. I've both been told this by people who can set policy in the company and have seen impressive evidence of it. You might look at SCO where Xenix can sub for UNIX. E H. Kinmonth Hist. Dept. Univ. of Ca., Davis Davis, Ca. 95616 916-752-1636/0776 Disclaimer: This is AmeriKa! Who needs a disclaimer! Internet: ehkinmonth@ucdavis.edu cck@deneb.ucdavis.edu BITNET: ehkinmonth@ucdavis UUCP: {ucbvax, lll-crg}!ucdavis!ehkinmonth {ucbvax, lll-crg}!ucdavis!deneb!cck
tom@lakesys.UUCP (Tom Baas) (06/17/88)
Steve, Let me just say ..That's the Business world for you. They sold their Goods to the university system to try to get the university environment educated and familiarized with their product. Then when you are locked in to their product they give you the one..two punch. That's how big businesses get big. Nothing unethical....just imoral. That's business ethics....human imorality. What you do is to learn to beat them at their own game. Buy their products when the prices are down and learn not to rely on them for support. Keep in contact with their competition and be ready to switch over on the dime. It's not only AT&T it's all the other big guys too. IBM products for example are no better than anybody elses. They have just brain washed people into thinking that their products are the only ones. They sell you a machine and the rest is up to you. You are no longer their friend until the next time you want another computer product. In the mean time they tell you that there is no such thing as another computer than IBM. You are stuck because only IBM products are compatable.(except for the pc's -they were outsmarted in that area. So they try OS/2 but it hasn't been successful because their competition is raring to go with OS/2 compatability.) At least UNIX is an open system environment and thus to some extent you can switch from one UNIX system to another without too much trouble.
txr98@wash08.UUCP (Timothy Reed) (06/18/88)
In article <745@lakesys.UUCP> steven@lakesys.UUCP (Steven Goodman) writes: > So $1200 buys me 3.0 - then $2400 upgrades me to 3.1 then ANOTHER > $2400 takes me to 3.2! So for $6000 I get the lastest code. If I > want binaries for a specific processor it's $400 bucks a pop per > upgrade. Hey, Steve, $6 grand isn't so bad, 5.3.1 source has to be purchased in the same manner (5.2 -> 5.3 -> 5.3.1 or whatever) would cost our non-profit institution about $25000. Why is src purchase done this way? I have no experience with src purchase of other operating systems, or purchase of other flavors of Unix, so I don't know if this purchasing thru the rev levels is common. Is it really blatant gouging like it seems, or are there a greater truth behind it? Is having old versions of the OS a desirable thing (other than it being cheaper) or what? +-------------------------------------------------------+ | Timothy Reed - American Chemical Society | | UUCP: ..uunet!wash08!txr98 | +-------------------------------------------------------+