dbfunk@ICAEN.UIOWA.EDU (David B. Funk) (11/19/88)
WRT posting <3fb4f835.7c9c@apollo.COM>, and Apollo's new graphics product license policy, I have a few questions. May one customer, who purchases the media & docs for a graphics product, give a copy of the runtime library to another customer who has purchased the OS (and thus has a right to use the graphics product)? Specifically, We've spent time developing programs that use GMR3D and that other institutions would like copies of. As they might not have the library, may we include a copy of it on the tape with our software? Ditto for things like ADUS library contributions? Our graphics applications are worthless if the intended receipient doesn't have the runtime libraries, they are devalued if the receipient must go out and buy the development package just to run the programs. The same holds true for solution suppliers who are thinking about developing graphics applications for Apollos. Now GPR is the only common denominator for graphics programs. GPR is nice but limited, it doesn't have the power and sophistication of the other graphics products. I full well understand why Apollo would want to unbundle the development environment. Many customers have little interest in developing programs, they only want to use them. Manuals are expensive things to make and distribute. To maintain competitive pricing for the basic OS, Apollo has to keep the costs down. So it makes sense to require developers to pay extra for their manuals rather than make everybody else pay for things that they don't want. However, the runtime libraries would only cost some extra feet of tape on a distribution kit. The SR9.7 runtime libraries for GSR, GMR3D & GMR2D add up to about 2.8 megabytes, that's 29 feet on a 600 foot cartridge tape or 163 feet on a 2400 foot mag tape. The SR9.7 OS distribution took 2 tapes, the second was far from full. Thus, it would seem, the only cost would have been the time it took to write out the extra info on the second tape. I realize that at SR10 things have gotten bigger, it now takes 4 tapes. Still, I would be surprised if the libraries couldn't be squeezed on to those tapes. The FORTRAN and C program development tools (ftn & cc) are unbundled but the runtime libraries (/lib/ftn & /lib/clib) are not. So my second question is: Why did Apollo unbundle the runtime libraries when they unbundled the development environments? (I realize that this is not a technical question, it's a marketing question.) How can Apollo reconcile selling 3D graphics hardware (DN590-T) and not automatically providing the software needed to use it (GMR3D,GSR)? Many people chose a computer system by the applications available for it. It doesn't matter how nice/powerful the hardware is, if it doesn't have the programs that they want/need, they won't buy it. Thus the applications often drive the market. When Apollo does things that will discourage applications creators, it's hurting itself (and indirectly, us). Thank you for your time and for providing us with accurate information about what is going on in Apollo. Dave Funk University of Iowa