jon@mtxinu.COM (jon hale) (03/01/91)
In article <3312@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > > I see that Mach is now availbale for the 386. Note that the super >discount offer ends on the 21st, while the posting is dated the 25th. >Boy that didn't cost them much! > That was my fault and I am sorry. We introduced our product at the January Uniforum/Usenix. I actually made the posting on the 11th, but because comp.newprod is a moderated newsgroup, it didn't get out to the net until the 25th. If I had realized that it would take so long to get out I would not have mentioned the introductory price. Instead I would just have mentioned that anybody can get a 10% discount by including payment with their order. Again, I apoligize. > Also not that for $500/year they will give you the same support >(dial-in uucp fixes) that SCO offers for free. Well, you can try dialing SCO, but I doubt if their fixes will work on our system :^) . Actually, some people are just subscribing for 1 quarter a year ($150) so that they can get their updates at less cost. >... Unless mt xinu has stopped using humans as >programmers there will be bugs in the first release which need fixing, Things have been looking up ever since we started going with the chimpanzees instead. >and I get the impression that unless you pay you get no support >whatever. You do get 30 day installation support. >-- >bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) - jon (jon@mtxinu.com)
benyukhi@motcid.UUCP (Ed Benyukhis) (03/02/91)
In article <1991Feb28.201150.18587@mtxinu.COM>, jon@mtxinu.COM (jon hale) writes: > In article <3312@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > > > That was my fault and I am sorry. We introduced our product at the > January Uniforum/Usenix. I actually made the posting on the 11th, but because > comp.newprod is a moderated newsgroup, it didn't get out to the net until > the 25th. > If I had realized that it would take so long to get out I would > not have mentioned the introductory price. Instead I would just have mentioned > that anybody can get a 10% discount by including payment with their order. > Again, I apoligize. Extend the introductory price offer if it is YOUR FAULT instead of appologizing. > > > Also not that for $500/year they will give you the same support > >(dial-in uucp fixes) that SCO offers for free. > > Well, you can try dialing SCO, but I doubt if their fixes will work > on our system :^) . They will not ... But this is a competitive environment, which is what Bill meant to say by his comment. If you plan to compete with SCO, ISC, and ESIX, you better shape up and attempt to provide similar level(s) of service. > > >... Unless mt xinu has stopped using humans as > >programmers there will be bugs in the first release which need fixing, > > Things have been looking up ever since we started going with the chimpanzees > instead. This is an unacceptible remark. And if you think that your level of expertise is higher than other vendors, you are in for a big surprise. You are acting like the product is being given away .... Well, it is not, and it costs big $$$$$. > > >and I get the impression that unless you pay you get no support > >whatever. > > You do get 30 day installation support. Is this from the time I receive the installation media or from the time it is postmarked??? What happens if I do not attempt to install it within first 30 days??? Doe this support lapse?? You have got to be kidding !!!!!! > > >-- > >bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) > > > - jon > (jon@mtxinu.com) Have fun with your marketing attempts. I do not think that I will be buying it in the near future. Nor will I recommend this product to anyone (unless it is distributed FREE of charge). Edward Benyukhis, Motorola, CID. (708)632-6624
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/04/91)
In article <6641@saffron1.UUCP> benyukhi@motcid.UUCP (Ed Benyukhis) writes: | This is an unacceptible remark. And if you think that your level of | expertise is higher than other vendors, you are in for a big surprise. | You are acting like the product is being given away .... Well, it is not, | and it costs big $$$$$. My impression is that there are some people who will buy something which is non-AT&T code for personal rather than technical reasons. The rest of the market will look at cost of ownership, features, performance, and then decide. This will probably be the only mach based PC product on the market for the next six months (maybe a year) so it will be interesting to see how it does. I'll watch from the sidelines for now. I get the impression from talking to local distributors that this is a mail order product only, or at least it's not being handled by my distributors. If that's the case I don't suspect too many VARs will be rushing right out to sell it, either. Does it really run V.3 applications, and which DOS emulator does it have? -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) (03/04/91)
In article <3366@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > Does [mach] really run V.3 applications, and which DOS emulator does it have? No, and none. At least as of yet. Whether this will change is an interesting question; it's not a terribly easy thing to do, and I suspect MtXinu might rather wait to use mach3.0 instead of 2.5. Of course, I could be wrong; but the people I've talked to about it said it had no such capability (yet?). -- Sean Eric Fagan | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it; sef@kithrup.COM | I had a bellyache at the time." -----------------+ -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_) Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.
shore@mtxinu.COM (Melinda Shore) (03/05/91)
In article <3366@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: > Does it really run V.3 applications, and which DOS emulator does it have? No, it doesn't run any SysV (binary) applications, and there is currently no DOS emulation. We don't have any ABI plans, either. The user/programmer interface looks almost exactly like 4.3-tahoe, right down to the system call interface, signal semantics, etc. The executable format is even a.out. People who are considering putting Mach on their machines should think pretty hard about why they want Mach, rather than one of the many System V variants out there. The product is really designed for programmers, not end-users. Our experience has shown us that there are a lot of people who want access to interesting technology but for one reason or another don't have all the appropriate licenses, people who prefer the BSD user interface, and people who want to get a jump on OSF/1. This product is for them. So, while it would be nice if mt Xinu could corner the 386 Unix market :-), we are the first to acknowledge that this product might not be the one you're looking for, especially if your primary concern is the ability to run existing applications, such as word processors, databases, etc. -- Software longa, hardware brevis Melinda Shore shore@mtxinu.com mt Xinu ..!uunet!mtxinu.com!shore
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (03/06/91)
> jon@mtxinu.COM (jon hale) chats a bit: > > That was my fault and I am sorry... > > ...I actually made the posting on the 11th, but because > > comp.newprod is a moderated newsgroup, it didn't get out to the net until > > the 25th. > > If I had realized that it would take so long to get out I would > > not have mentioned the introductory price... In response, benyukhi@motcid.UUCP (Ed Benyukhis) flames: > Extend the introductory price offer if it is YOUR FAULT instead of > appologizing. Now go back and read what Jon said. He's sorry for mentioning an offer which expired before the article appeared--but why should Jon have expec- ted such a delay? Why does the simple courtesy of "I'm sorry this hap- pened" get turned into "then GIMME!"? Why should mt Xinu bear the cost of the moderator's indolence? A two-week delay just for a moderator to slap "Approved:..." on an article and send it out is unconscionable. Nor is this an isolated instance of such delays in comp.newprod. Ed, if it upsets you so much, why don't you offer to help the real problem here, namely the comp.newprod delay? The moderator is at another Motorola site, adjacent to yours. > ...If you plan to compete > with SCO, ISC, and ESIX, you better shape up and attempt to provide > similar level(s) of service. I do not see any indication that mt Xinu intends to compete with SCO, ISC, ESIX. In fact, I've seen them make the point more than once that Mach 386 is of interest for academia and research, intended for use by programmers (or words to that effect). You're attacking them for not doing something they've said they don't want to do! Beyond that, the tone of your posting is entirely inappropriate. Jon gave a lighthearted response to some rather caustic remarks, wisely attempting to cool the flames rather than fan them. "You better shape up" may work with children, or in the military; it is entirely out of place among peers. > > Things have been looking up ever since we started going with the chimpanzees > > instead. > This is an unacceptible remark... OK, how did *you* think Jon should have responded to something like "unless mt Xinu has stopped using humans as programmers..."? Is the idea that a vendor is simply supposed to bow its head and act contrite whenever anyone starts dishing out snide remarks? And some of you folks still wonder why vendors are so quiet in this newsgroup??? (I only post because I don't have good sense and nobody's told me to shut up yet.) >...And if you think that your level of > expertise is higher than other vendors, you are in for a big surprise. Ed, do you know anything about mt Xinu? Unless they've gotten rid of a bunch of key people, their level of expertise probably IS higher than most other vendors. They're not exactly new to UNIX, y'know. Moreover, mt Xinu has never seemed to buy into the tight-lipped, grim seriousness that you see some companies use as ersatz "professionalism." Good for them on that count. > Have fun with your marketing attempts. I do not think that I will > be buying it in the near future. Nor will I recommend this product > to anyone (unless it is distributed FREE of charge). Why is your recommendation (or lack of it) at issue? The extent of your knowledge of the product seems to be a few postings here in c.u.sysv386. I've got a copy of Mach 386 at home, and it seems pretty solid. (OK, better explain quickly before the jackals come after me for that one.:-) I've got two machines--the main one running ISC 2.2 and the little one running Mach. Sheeesh! This group gets out of control...I've defended SCO against flames in the past; now I'm defending mt Xinu? (Of course, I dare not defend ISC or I get blasted into an alternate dimension.:-) Flames are OK, but there ought to be a layer of general respect and courtesy beneath. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 ...But is it art?
jon@mtxinu.COM (jon hale) (03/06/91)
In article <6641@saffron1.UUCP> benyukhi@motcid.UUCP (Ed Benyukhis) writes: >In article <1991Feb28.201150.18587@mtxinu.COM>, jon@mtxinu.COM (jon hale) writes: >> In article <3312@sixhub.UUCP> davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: >> > >> > Also note that for $500/year they will give you the same support >> >(dial-in uucp fixes) that SCO offers for free. >> >> Well, you can try dialing SCO, but I doubt if their fixes will work >> on our system :^) . > >They will not ... But this is a competitive environment, which is >what Bill meant to say by his comment. If you plan to compete >with SCO, ISC, and ESIX, you better shape up and attempt to provide >similar level(s) of service. > [ ......] >Have fun with your marketing attempts. I do not think that I will >be buying it in the near future. Nor will I recommend this product >to anyone (unless it is distributed FREE of charge). > >Edward Benyukhis, Motorola, CID. >(708)632-6624 Ed and Bill, I get the impression from reading your mail that you feel that mt Xinu is a rip-off company just out to make a quick buck. This is really not the case. We have been providing supported Berkeley UNIX on a variety of hardware platforms for the past seven years. We have built our reputation doing just that. You also seem to feel that we are competing with the system V vendors out there. We are not, our Mach386 product provides both MACH as well as 4.3BSD to the 386 world. We DO NOT: provide binary compatible with system V systems. provide DOS compatibility (or emulation). have off-the-shelf applications ready to run. We DO: provide full source compatibility with 4.3BSD. provide full MACH functionality. have the full set of BSD utilities. We realize that many people are interested in the features that we do not provide. That is fine, we are not trying to pretend to be something that we are not. But, there exists a community (primarily researchers and programmers) where BSD and MACH are very important. There is, in fact, active interest in our product. We do not expect to do the volume business that the system V UNIX's will be doing. As with everything else, in our businesses there are economies of scale. They will be doing a lot more volume and will be able to afford charging lower prices. This does not make us ripoff artists. If we could not charge the prices we do, we would not be able to afford to provide our services, and a lot of people do see it as a service. Sincerely, jon hale
james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) (03/07/91)
In <3366@sixhub.UUCP>, davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) wrote: > My impression is that there are some people who will buy something > which is non-AT&T code for personal rather than technical reasons. The > rest of the market will look at cost of ownership, features, > performance, and then decide. There are people who don't care if their unix box runs DOS, and have no use for SysVr3 compatibility, much less Xenix-isms. Remember that the academic world that runs unix typically runs something much closer to Mach than to SysVr3. I'm not sure what Mt. Xinu's market will be. There are admittedly few hacks who (1) have a 386 box and (2) don't care about DOS or Xenix. But there are substantial numbers of users who are used to BSD, and I would venture a guess that most CS people at universities are exposed to BSD before SysV. The main market is obviously the academic and large commercial sites that haven't let SysV in the door yet. But I assume it's a tough sell against Sun... -- James R. Van Artsdalen james@bigtex.cactus.org "Live Free or Die" Dell Computer Co 9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759 512-338-8789
witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow) (03/07/91)
Dear Mr. Hale: I don't have much sympathy for the tone of the flames directed at MtXinu recently. However, In article <1991Mar5.232240.19264@mtxinu.COM> you write: >We have been providing supported Berkeley UNIX on a variety >of hardware platforms for the past seven years. ... > If we could not charge the prices we do, we would not be able to > afford to provide our services... From what I understand of your announcement, the services you are providing for the purchase fee are: 1) Paying royalties to ATT, 2) Repackaging working CMU software, 3) Duplicating it onto floppies and tapes, 4) and (although not stated, but I would assume) duplicating the documentation. The services your *are not* providing for this fee are, 1) Helping to solve customer's problems, 2) Providing bug fixes. Or, in other words, you are *not* providing support for the purchase price. You *sell* these services for additional amounts. Thus, unless you have a different definition for support than I do, you do not ``provide supported Berkeley UNIX'' or supported Mach; rather you sell *unsupported* Berkeley Unix and Mach, and charge additional for the support. I don't object to your doing this, but I wish you would be more forthright in your descriptions. I personally find $1,000 a little steep for a duplicating service. There is an old saw in the software business that, when applied to your company, goes like this: ``The software sells for $1,000. Of course, if you want it to work that will be an additional $500 per year.'' -- --- Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Chip Rosenthal) (03/08/91)
>From what I understand of your announcement, the services you are >providing for the purchase fee are: > > 1) Paying royalties to ATT, > 2) Repackaging working CMU software, > 3) Duplicating it onto floppies and tapes, > 4) and (although not stated, but I would assume) duplicating the >documentation. <flame_on> No...you don't understand jack shit. Mt. Xinu has been around for a looong time. Back when all you dudes and dudettes were doing reeely kool stuff like writing BASIC programs for your peecee, Mt. Xinu was shipping the UNIX of choice (BSD4.x) for the hardware system of choice (VAXen). Originally they were the only game in town. Even once DEC grudgingly started shipping an Ultrix, many folks still preferred to run Mt. Xinu's stuff. Funny thing that so many people like Mt. Xinu's BSD. All they do is pay royalties to AT&T, repackage the BSD software, and duplicate the documentation. It is quite ironic that the people who are flaming Mt. Xinu don't want Mach/386 anyway - they are just too ignorant to realize it. If they extricated their heads from their anal cavities, they would realize that Mach/386 is not going to run their Lotus and WordPerfect gunk. In fact, if you don't already know that you want Mach/386 - take my word for it, you probably don't. Well...Mt. Xinu is now bringing what they have done so well in the past on big iron down to the little boxes. Sure, Mach/386 is pricey. But there is only a select group of folks out there who is going to want it. And to those who want it, it will be a great boon. This is what's called, boyz and girlz, a `niche market'. Things in a niche market are more expensive. Ever wondered why a 4-port serial card is more than 2x the cost of a 2-port serial card? That's niche marketing. (There, maybe that's something you peecee heads can understand.) I don't run Mach/386. And I probably won't. I understand what it is, and it doesn't fit in with my expected needs. But that's ok. I played with it a bit at Uniforum, and it seems slick. I don't think I've ever seen anything fork() as fast as this sucker does. Unix has been around a long time. So has Mt. Xinu. When Mt. Xinu announces a product, it would be in your best interests to shut your yap and take a good hard look. I do. These folks have some of the best UNIX systems programmers in the world - even in these days when anybody who bought a peecee thru Computer Shopper calls themselves a UNIX expert. Maybe some of you net.newbies should get a little perspective. Go get the book by Libes and Ressler. That way you can at least pretend you know something about UNIX without making a total arse of yourself. <flame_off> I'm not kowtowing to vendors here, but the incessant vendor bashing is really hurting this group. Lord knows, I've lobbed my own gernades at ISC support and SCO security in the past few weeks. All I can say is I try to pick my targets carefully. I wouldn't pretend to have any great influence upon the world, but the fact that SCO has recently released an SLF to address security and Marty at ISC appears to be driving support into gear at least tells me I haven't been too far off the mark. So, I'm not going to pretend that this is a tea party and we should all be polite and keep our elbows off the table, but flaming a vendor you don't know over a product you've never seen is just downright silly. The problem is, after a while people begin to realize that it's probably smarter to move out of the target area than continue to have bombs dropped upon your head. It's nice to have a channel to vent our collective spleens. In the long run, it would be a lot better if folks would hang around here and not fear for their heads every time they come up for air. -- Chip Rosenthal 512-482-8260 | Unicom Systems Development | I saw Elvis in my wtmp file. <chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM> |
series@well.sf.ca.us (Frank Korzeniewski) (03/09/91)
In article <1991Mar6.183453.944@rwwa.COM> witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow) writes:
^From what I understand of your announcement, the services you are
^providing for the purchase fee are:
^
^ 1) Paying royalties to ATT,
^ 2) Repackaging working CMU software,
^ 3) Duplicating it onto floppies and tapes,
^ 4) and (although not stated, but I would assume) duplicating the
^documentation.
^
^The services your *are not* providing for this fee are,
^ 1) Helping to solve customer's problems,
^ 2) Providing bug fixes.
^Or, in other words, you are *not* providing support for the purchase
^price. You *sell* these services for additional amounts.
^
I quote from the documentation supplied with the commercial Mach product
from Mt Xinu:
"Mt Xinu is pleased to provide 30 days of free installation support with
every Mach386 license sold."
What this tells me, Mr Robert Withrow, is that you do not in any way know what
you are talking about.
^Thus, unless you have a different definition for support than I do,
^you do not ``provide supported Berkeley UNIX'' or supported Mach;
^rather you sell *unsupported* Berkeley Unix and Mach, and charge
^additional for the support. I don't object to your doing this, but I
^wish you would be more forthright in your descriptions.
^
^I personally find $1,000 a little steep for a duplicating service.
^There is an old saw in the software business that, when applied to
^your company, goes like this:
^
^``The software sells for $1,000. Of course, if you want it to work
^that will be an additional $500 per year.''
^--
I further quote from the Mach paperwork:
"Mt Xinu warrents to you (the original Licensee) that the Software will
be in operable condition as described in the documentation, and that the
diskettes upon which the Software is furnished will be free from defects
in material and workmanship under normal use, for a period of ninety (90)
days after delivery to you ("Warranty Period"). You must report all defects
within the Warranty Period to be eligible for warranty service."
I used to work at Mt Xinu, I left there about a year ago. They are some
of the brightest and most hardworking people I know. I have seen how
much effort it takes to take software from a research environment and
make it into a commercial product. I consider your remarks, Mr Robert
W Withrow, highly insulting. If I ever run into you I will punch you in
the nose.
^---
^ Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA
^ Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
frk (series@well.sf.ca Frank Korzeniewski)witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow) (03/10/91)
I am so glad to learn that this group is frequented by such inteligent, helpful, mature folks as series@well.sf.ca.us (Frank Korzeniewski) who writes: ``If I ever run into you I will punch you in the nose'', and chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Chip Rosenthal) who writes ``you don't understand jack shit'' and suggests that people like me should ``extricate their heads from their anal cavities''. I'm sure you two will go far in the world with your delightful attitudes. Of course, if you had taken the time to *read* what I wrote, instead of gleefully spewing out your ad hominum brayings, you would have noticed that I said: ``From what I understand of your announcement...''. When Frank says: ``I quote from the documentation supplied with the commercial Mach product..'' he is providing information from a source I don't have. While I am not usually interrest in collecting insults or threats, I genuinely like to get information. So let me assume that Frank (who went to the effort to supply some usefull information, as opposed to Chip, who merely pontificated his opinions) just got carried away with his excitement: >"Mt Xinu warrents to you (the original Licensee) that the Software will >be in operable condition as described in the documentation, and that the >diskettes upon which the Software is furnished will be free from defects >in material and workmanship under normal use, for a period of ninety (90) >days after delivery to you ("Warranty Period"). You must report all defects >within the Warranty Period to be eligible for warranty service." I'm glad to see that Mt Xinu does this; the SYSV vendors generally don't give any real warrantee. You didn't state what ``warranty service'' is defined as, but apparently it is not the same as ``support'' since the two terms are used in different sections. This is not still totally satisfactory, since it does not deal with issues like fitness-to-purpose. Also, since software does not ``wear'', the limitation to 90 days does not make any sense. Nonetheless this beats a blank... Let me make a (hopefully) constructive suggestion to MtXinu that I believe would not adversly affect their profit margin (and would, I believe, actually enhance it by increasing sales): Sell Mach (for the $1000 or $1500 or whatever) with an ``Unlimited Money back Guarantee''. Provide bug fixes (as *distinct* from upgrades and enhancements) for free (perhaps by placing them on UUNET or something). Upgrade and enhance the product once or twice a year for about $200-$300) and handle problems and questions without requiring support contracts. This stragegy limits your support costs because you can always pull the plug and give a refund. And you build an almost fanatical customer loyalty because your customers know you stand behind your product and will either make it work or will give them back their money (``put it in writing''). Additionally, this helps you build a better product because your users will help you with your QC in a co-operative atmosphere (e.g. ``Thank you for reporting that problem. Let's get a fix for you.'') rather than a semi-adversarial one (``I'm sorry, we can't help you unless you send us some more money to fix software that was broken when you bought it from us.''). Of course, there will always be the small percentage of bums who will take undue advantage of the warantee, but experience shows that they are a very small percentage, and that the advantages greatly outweigh the drawbacks. -- --- Robert Withrow, R.W. Withrow Associates, Swampscott MA 01907 USA Tel: +1 617 598 4480, Fax: +1 617 598 4430, Net: witr@rwwa.COM
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) (03/11/91)
As quoted from <1991Mar5.205315.28729@ico.isc.com> by rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn): +--------------- | Sheeesh! This group gets out of control...I've defended SCO against | flames in the past; now I'm defending mt Xinu? (Of course, I dare not | defend ISC or I get blasted into an alternate dimension.:-) Flames are | OK, but there ought to be a layer of general respect and courtesy beneath. +--------------- This *is* Usenet... 90% of the posts come from the 10% of readers that have an eighth grade mentality or worse. ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery Ham: KB8JRR on 40m, 10m when time Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG permits; also 2m, 220, 440, 1200 America OnLine: KB8JRR // Delphi: ALLBERY AMPR: kb8jrr.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery KB8JRR @ WA8BXN.OH
mike (03/12/91)
In an article, rwwa.COM!witr (Robert W. Withrow) writes: |Sell Mach (for the $1000 or $1500 or whatever) with an ``Unlimited |Money back Guarantee''. Provide bug fixes (as *distinct* from |upgrades and enhancements) for free (perhaps by placing them on UUNET |or something). Upgrade and enhance the product once or twice a year |for about $200-$300) and handle problems and questions without |requiring support contracts. I don't think that this is a very realistic expectation. Providing a money back guarantee without restriction is equivalent to hanging a sign on your front door stating ``No one is home; thieves are welcome.'' |Of course, there will always be the small percentage of bums who will |take undue advantage of the warantee, but experience shows that they |are a very small percentage, and that the advantages greatly outweigh |the drawbacks. I think that you are overly optimistic in your views on human nature. -- Michael Stefanik, MGI Inc., Los Angeles| Opinions stated are not even my own. Title of the week: Systems Engineer | UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember folks: If you can't flame MS-DOS, then what _can_ you flame?
sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar9.192526.2572@rwwa.COM> witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow) writes: >handle problems and questions without >requiring support contracts. A lot of the questions support people at SCO get, I gather, are hand-holding type of things. Things like "How do I remove a file beginning with a '-'?" "How do I do <such and such>?" most of which are available either in the manual, the release notes, or by some thinking. Guess what: having people answer the phones costs *lots* of money, especially when the questions are stupid. That is one of the main reasons vendors charge money for support; the charges do *not* cover the times when the questions do require some serious insight and research into the product. But, hey, it seems as if a lot of people reading this group want something free, so I'll probably get flamed (again). -- Sean Eric Fagan | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it; sef@kithrup.COM | I had a bellyache at the time." -----------------+ -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_) Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (03/12/91)
witr@rwwa.COM (Robert W. Withrow) writes: [comments on Korzeniewski, Rosenthal postings] > Of course, if you had taken the time to *read* what I wrote, instead > of gleefully spewing out your ad hominum brayings, you would have > noticed that I said: ``From what I understand of your > announcement...''... OK, so if that's the difference, I gather one makes an insult acceptable by preceding it with "From what I understand..."? After all, you concluded that "from what you understand" mt Xinu is just a very expensive floppy- duplicating service which doesn't really provide support - and that is a deep insult to some very good people. Does this mean you would not have been offended if Chip had written instead, "From what I understand, you don't know jack shit..."? Chip, Frank: take note--here's a way to flame next time without offending! Perhaps the level of flame you got from these two people is higher than you might have expected. You may have been unlucky in that respect, as the anti-vendor flames have been wearing thin on some people here. You just happened to say the wrong thing about the wrong people in the wrong way in the wrong place at the wrong time. > ...Also, since software does not ``wear'', the > limitation to 90 days does not make any sense... You want an infinite warranty? A more useful statement would be "since software doesn't `wear', the analogy to a warranty on a physical commodity does not make sense." > Let me make a (hopefully) constructive suggestion to MtXinu that I > believe would not adversly affect their profit margin (and would, I > believe, actually enhance it by increasing sales): > > Sell Mach (for the $1000 or $1500 or whatever) with an ``Unlimited > Money back Guarantee''... Why not just suggest that they declare Chapter 7? Comes down to the same thing. Now, you *could* suggest that they sell the software with unlimited-term bug fixes...that's half of what you're asking...but the price is *not* going to be $1000-1500, or anything close to it. > This stragegy limits your support costs because you can always pull > the plug and give a refund... Sure...and the customer can pull the plug and TAKE a refund. He can use it until it's obsolete, find a bug (or whatever) and demand a refund. He gets the use of it for as long as he wants; the price of the software is merely a deposit. > Of course, there will always be the small percentage of bums who will > take undue advantage of the warantee, but experience shows that they > are a very small percentage, and that the advantages greatly outweigh > the drawbacks. Experience shows nothing of the sort. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 ...But is it art?
richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) (03/13/91)
>> Of course, if you had taken the time to *read* what I wrote, instead >> of gleefully spewing out your ad hominum brayings, you would have >> noticed that I said: ``From what I understand of your >> announcement...''... > >OK, so if that's the difference, I gather one makes an insult acceptable >by preceding it with "From what I understand..."? After all, you concluded >that "from what you understand" mt Xinu is just a very expensive floppy- >duplicating service which doesn't really provide support - and that is a >deep insult to some very good people. > >Does this mean you would not have been offended if Chip had written instead, >"From what I understand, you don't know jack shit..."? [...] This is a very unfair re-interpretation (out of context) of what was said in the original posting. Please take it easy Dick, and pay attention. The "From what I understand ...", was in reference to the Mach announcement that was posted earlier in this thread (not a reference to Mr. Withrow's total worldly knowledge, or lack thereof). Here's a larger fragment of that text to put things back into perspective: "From what I understand of your announcement, the services you are providing for the purchase fee are:" Mr. Withrow made some very good points. He may not have stated them in a way amenable to all, but what do you expect -- they are fairly controversial. Considering how contrary his ideas are to the vendors current way of doing business I can see how they would prefer not to hear them or see them discussed in public. It's my opinion that somewhere between what Mr. Withrow suggests and what SCO, ISC, mt Xinu, et al, currently practice is an approach to software licensing and support (or bug fixing if you prefer) that is fair and reasonable. It is apparently the opinion of many, that the current practice is neither fair nor reasonable. Current licensing practices are still too closely tied to the old mainframe market approach where there was little competition once you bought into a particular machine and OS, and a license agreement was pretty close to extortion. It sounds like mt Xinu is coming somewhat closer to reasonableness than the other guys, so maybe it's a little unfair to single them out, but at some point soon this whole mess has got to change. What ticks me off about the whole thing is that I think the vendors and screwing themselves (and the rest of us) out of a much larger market by being so prickish. Maybe GNU or 386BSD will force them to think again. -- Richard Foulk richard@pegasus.com
james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) (03/14/91)
In <514@bria>, uunet!bria!mike wrote: > I don't think that this is a very realistic expectation. Providing > a money back guarantee without restriction is equivalent to hanging a > sign on your front door stating ``No one is home; thieves are > welcome.'' It's not so bad. Yes, there are thieves among us. But from a vendor's standpoint, the risk may be worth it in order to minimize legitimate customer's concerns, and thereby make a sale that might otherwise be lost. For example, there was a lot of speculation about whether Dell SysVr4 would run on non-Dell hardware. Well, with the 30-day money-back trial period, it's not that risky to just try it and see. We use the same idea to sell hardware to people unsure of compatibility. This is probably a good point to have in the product comparison list posted every so often. I'm assume some other vendors do something to minimize customer's risk. -- James R. Van Artsdalen james@bigtex.cactus.org "Live Free or Die" Dell Computer Co 9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759 512-338-8789
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) (03/17/91)
As quoted from <1991Mar11.225205.13658@kithrup.COM> by sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan): +--------------- | A lot of the questions support people at SCO get, I gather, are hand-holding | type of things. Things like "How do I remove a file beginning with a '-'?" | "How do I do <such and such>?" most of which are available either in the | manual, the release notes, or by some thinking. Guess what: having people | answer the phones costs *lots* of money, especially when the questions are | stupid. That is one of the main reasons vendors charge money for support; | the charges do *not* cover the times when the questions do require some | serious insight and research into the product. +--------------- No argument. Aside from the fact that having to staff for this can make it real hard to get support for *real* problems (i.e. the current problem with ISC). Back when I was evaluating the then-new Informix-SQL 1.10, I had to go through a number of levels of idiots who were convinced I was typing in illegal SQL statements before I got one who understood that the fact the example in the manual was causing SQL to dump core was in fact a bug. +--------------- | But, hey, it seems as if a lot of people reading this group want something | free, so I'll probably get flamed (again). +--------------- Undoubtedly. But recall my previous message in this group (90% of posts...). It's not worth worrying about. ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery Ham: KB8JRR on 40m, 10m when time Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG permits; also 2m, 220, 440, 1200 America OnLine: KB8JRR // Delphi: ALLBERY AMPR: kb8jrr.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery KB8JRR @ WA8BXN.OH
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar11.225205.13658@kithrup.COM> sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: | A lot of the questions support people at SCO get, I gather, are hand-holding | type of things. Things like "How do I remove a file beginning with a '-'?" | But, hey, it seems as if a lot of people reading this group want something | free, so I'll probably get flamed (again). SCO does it right in theory. They make their bug fixes available for download via uucp or ftp. This makes sense, since if the original product sold was not fully functional the customer is entitled to a fix. SCO charges for handholding and upgrades (new features). That's fair. I have two gripes with SCO... the first is that even if you have a support contract you will fight for a fix about one third of the time. The response to emailed problems is erratic; sometimes great, sometimes really slow and/or inaccurate. In spite of that, it's better that the people who answer the phone on the "front line" support. These people can not ever write down what I say, and assume the customer has no idea what s/he's talking about. Even when you tell them where the problem lies, they start at the level of "is the power on? The red switch at the back of the box..." The solution to this is some kind of bypass number assigned to a customer who is experienced, so that we could get to someone with more info quickly. Sort of a non-dolt ID number... The second gripe is the support policy on a new copy of the software. I have suggested many times that they offer some fixed small number of questions or hours in the first year, instead of all the stupid questions you can ask in a month. After doing a double digit number of SCO installs, people may go months before they have a question, then be told their support time has expired. This burdens SCO answering dumb questions, and hurts people who have real problems. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (03/18/91)
In article <1991Mar13.131755.6425@pegasus.com> richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk) writes: | It's my opinion that somewhere between what Mr. Withrow suggests and | what SCO, ISC, mt Xinu, et al, currently practice is an approach to | software licensing and support (or bug fixing if you prefer) that is | fair and reasonable. I haven't used ISC since their support was changed, but SCO is putting bug fixes out via uucp and ftp for free. To me that's fair and reasonable. I've made comments on the rest of their support before, no need to repeat. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me