bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp (BRADLEY GRIGOR) (02/19/90)
Subj: open this package and you're stuck with it
nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) writes
nM> Part of the problem is that the manufacturers are abusing the
nM> "you open it, you can't return it" clause on their packaging.
nM> The implicit licensing agreement is supposed to protect them
nM> from unauthorized copying but it provides them with an excuse
nM> to ship expensive junky products knowing that they can't be
nM> returned. If I spend $350 on a TV and I'm not satisfied I can
^^^^^^^^
nM> return it; if I spend $350 on a C++ compiler I'm stuck with it
nM> no matter how dissatisfying it is. This has to change. Software
nM> is an increasingly big business and consumers of software deserve
nM> the same rights and protections that they get for other products.
Well, not entirely true! I bought the Microsoft FORTRAN compiler
to move some software from VAX/VMS to MS-DOS -- something the MS
advertising said their FORTRAN could handle, since it recognized
the VAX/VMS extensions. True, it DID recognize the extensions,
but it was unable to handle a decent sized symbol table --
something one takes for granted under VAX/VMS.
After following Microsoft's action plan (in which they
unsuccessfully tried to get my program to compile), Microsoft
finally authorized the dealer to REFUND my money.
Although Microsoft started by saying it was against their policy
to take software back and give refunds, it is to their credit
that they escalated the problem to head office, proposed an action
plan and then followed through on it.
I think they may have also stopped promoting the VAX/VMS
capability of their compiler at the same time! After all,
there's more to it than simply parsing the same language syntax!
bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp : ALEX is coming to Toronto in April.
Newmarket, Ontario, Canada : TelePoker will be there - will YOU?
---
~ DeLuxe 1.11a20 #4613 Don't worry: the answer's at the back of the book.nelson_p@apollo.HP.COM (Peter Nelson) (02/23/90)
bradley.grigor@canremote.uucp posts... >nM> return it; if I spend $350 on a C++ compiler I'm stuck with it >nM> no matter how dissatisfying it is. This has to change. Software >nM> is an increasingly big business and consumers of software deserve >nM> the same rights and protections that they get for other products. > >Well, not entirely true! I bought the Microsoft FORTRAN compiler >to move some software from VAX/VMS to MS-DOS -- something the MS >advertising said their FORTRAN could handle, since it recognized >the VAX/VMS extensions. True, it DID recognize the extensions, >but it was unable to handle a decent sized symbol table -- >something one takes for granted under VAX/VMS. > >After following Microsoft's action plan (in which they >unsuccessfully tried to get my program to compile), Microsoft >finally authorized the dealer to REFUND my money. > >Although Microsoft started by saying it was against their policy >to take software back and give refunds, it is to their credit >that they escalated the problem to head office, proposed an action >plan and then followed through on it. Yes, and I've since heard similar tales about a number of other products, including one fellow who managed to get his money back from Zortech! So I guess the moral of the story is that if you are willing to go to enough trouble or make a big enough stink about it then you can get your money back, even from companies who say that they don't do refunds. And there are few people in the world who can make a bigger stink about something unsatisfactory than yours truly; so I suppose such a policy favors me. But I would really rather not go to the trouble. I would prefer to just mail back the product with a short note describing the problem and get a check in the mail. Still, I do enjoy a good fight once in a while. So maybe I'll make a point of buying some of the software for my new computer in-state and test out our implied warranty law on the first product that screws up. ---Peter