[comp.unix.sysv386] GNU and the issue of support

rlin@cs.ubc.ca (Robert Lin) (09/10/90)

Is it really true, that a free product like GNU would have no support?
No customer hand-holding? I wonder. The frustrating thing about the
present commercial UNIX products is that there are holes, big bugs, that
nobody really gets around to fix. We wait forever for things to get fixed,
and nothing ever happens.

If source code was freely available, you can be sure a dozen gurus on the
net would jump into the fray and produce bug fixes in a fraction of the time
it takes for any other commercial UNIX vendor.

Take GCC as a good example. People find bugs, bugs get posted, and a fixed
version comes, usually within the month. Even before then, you can generally
find patches for those people impatient for the new version.

And then there's the other myth, the lack of software support. Will we really
not have DOS support under GNU? Maybe in the first six months, yeah, but
before too long, someone will put together a DOS package. If not FSF itself,
which isn't at all interested in DOS integration, then a third party, a
local net guru, or someone like that.

I'd willingly and happily pay which ever commercial company good money, if
I can have the same level of openness that I'd get for free with GNU.
If whenever I report a bug, and they know its there, but can't fix it,
I'd like to receive a copy of the source code so I can fix it myself.

I'd even be willing to protect their commercial interest by signing a
non-disclosure, and after submitting my fixes, destory my copy.

Sure, it is expensive to support a product. Good tech support people are
hard to find, and harder to retain. As a software vendor myself, I can
sympathize with the cost of maintenance. But as a private individual,
a programmer, a guy who only wants to see a smoothly running system,
I cheer the arrival of GNU.

-Robert Lin <rlin@cs.ubc.ca>

boylanr@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (ross boylan) (09/10/90)

rlin@cs.ubc.ca (Robert Lin) writes:

>Is it really true, that a free product like GNU would have no support?
>No customer hand-holding? I wonder. The frustrating thing about the
>present commercial UNIX products is that there are holes, big bugs, that
>nobody really gets around to fix. We wait forever for things to get fixed,
>and nothing ever happens.

Actually, I recently read (amongst all the GNU stuff) that there are 
some companies which will provide support/hand holding for (some of?)
the GNU stuff.  FSF keeps a list, and says they are very pleased
with this development.

shields@yunexus.YorkU.CA (Paul Shields) (09/10/90)

rlin@cs.ubc.ca (Robert Lin) writes:
>I'd willingly and happily pay which ever commercial company good money, if
>I can have the same level of openness that I'd get for free with GNU.
>If whenever I report a bug, and they know its there, but can't fix it,
>I'd like to receive a copy of the source code so I can fix it myself.

>I'd even be willing to protect their commercial interest by signing a
>non-disclosure, and after submitting my fixes, destory my copy.

It's time to write into law that software warranties give the user
some form of support, as for example the GNU license.  You always can
have the source code.  It may not be cheap to fix a problem, but it's
almost always cheaper than redoing something from scratch.

It really irritates me when, time after time, upon calling a company
and reporting a problem I have with their software, going over the
usual answer of "oh yes, we know about that, but why don't you grit
your teeth and wait -- we'll probably generate a fix by the time hell
freezes over," etc, and ask if there is any way I can negotiate a
source licence, they say, flatly, "no".  In case you were wondering,
it's happened to me more than once.  Of course I have no legal
recourse because the software contains the usual non-warranty.

It's time to make laws to invalidate those non-warranties.
Suggestions as to how such a law should be worded?


Paul Shields

james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) (09/10/90)

In <57679@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, boylanr@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (ross boylan) wrote:

> Actually, I recently read (amongst all the GNU stuff) that there are 
> some companies which will provide support/hand holding for (some of?)
> the GNU stuff.  FSF keeps a list, and says they are very pleased
> with this development.

This is correct.  Cygnus Software (Michael Tiemann's company I think)
is an example.  They are a service company, not a product company -
they do ports of GNU products and support for it.  For example, a
company needing a compiler for their new HAL-9000 system could hire
out both the port and and the maintenance (both internal and end user
support).  This is likely far and away the cheapest way to get a solid
product in the shortest time.

Now, if someone would just hire out Cygnus to do a gcc/gdb port to SysVr4...
-- 
James R. Van Artsdalen          james@bigtex.cactus.org   "Live Free or Die"
Dell Computer Co    9505 Arboretum Blvd Austin TX 78759         512-338-8789

davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (09/10/90)

In article <14926@yunexus.YorkU.CA> shields@yunexus.YorkU.CA (Paul Shields) writes:

| It's time to make laws to invalidate those non-warranties.
| Suggestions as to how such a law should be worded?

  No law needed. The free market system works just fine. There are some
companies which offer source license. The fact that they don't sominate
the market indicates that many people don't want to maintain their own
software. The existance of companies like Cygnus which maintain GNU
software indicates that people are willing to PAY MONEY not to maintain
software even if they can.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
    VMS is a text-only adventure game. If you win you can use unix.

jtc@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (J.T. Conklin) (09/10/90)

In article <46859@bigtex.cactus.org> james@bigtex.cactus.org (James Van Artsdalen) writes:
>This is correct.  Cygnus Software (Michael Tiemann's company I think)
>is an example.  They are a service company, not a product company -
>they do ports of GNU products and support for it.  For example, a
>company needing a compiler for their new HAL-9000 system could hire
>out both the port and and the maintenance (both internal and end user
>support).  This is likely far and away the cheapest way to get a solid
>product in the shortest time.
>
>Now, if someone would just hire out Cygnus to do a gcc/gdb port to SysVr4...

One of the biggest complaints in this forum about the various i386
UNIX vendors (in fact, UNIX vendors in general) is poor software
development tools.

It makes sense that an OS vendor would put a lot of effort into
rectifying this situation, as a good development system allows
third-party developers to port their products to their platforms
easily: People are unlikely to purchase your UNIX system if the
application they need is not available.

Unfortunately, I don't see the situation improving, especially in i386
environments.  SCO still uses the Microsoft Compiler that still
occasionally spills infinitely and is perpetually one rev behind the
DOS version.  ISC has just licensed the LPI C compiler, which a netter
recently compared to COBOL without the OBOL.

Think of what could have been achieved if ISC had spent the licensing
fees to Cygnus or even hired a couple of compiler jocks to bring gcc
up to their standards.

I am tired with fighting with the development systems offered by OS
vendors.  Rather than continuing on with the battle, I have resigned
myself to the fact that I will be required to carry my own development
system arround with me to each system I port to.

	--jtc

PS: 
The above statements outline some of my dissatisfaction with the
current offerings of most vendors.  I am happy to report that not all
of my experiences have been bad.  I recently did the initial port of
our UNIX Facsimile Gateway to the Data General Aviion.  The port went
flawlessly, and the Fax Gateway was up and running within 45 minutes.

PPS:
DG's stock compiler is gcc.

-- 
J.T. Conklin	UniFax Communications Inc.
		...!{uunet,ubc-cs}!van-bc!jtc, jtc@wimsey.bc.ca

russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (09/11/90)

In article <14926@yunexus.YorkU.CA> shields@yunexus.YorkU.CA (Paul Shields) writes:
>
>It really irritates me when, time after time, upon calling a company
>and reporting a problem I have with their software, going over the
>usual answer of "oh yes, we know about that, but why don't you grit
>your teeth and wait -- we'll probably generate a fix by the time hell
>freezes over," etc, and ask if there is any way I can negotiate a
>source licence, they say, flatly, "no".  In case you were wondering,
>it's happened to me more than once.  Of course I have no legal
>recourse because the software contains the usual non-warranty.
>
>It's time to make laws to invalidate those non-warranties.
>Suggestions as to how such a law should be worded?

No individual shall distribute a piece of software, without devoting himself
to a lifelong commitment to fix any problem with that software, immediately
and without additional compensation.  Alternatively, the individual is
required to distribute, free of additional charge, all information and source
materials used to create the piece of software.

(obviously, I feel this is a very bad idea)

wilkes@mips.COM (John Wilkes) (09/11/90)

In article <14926@yunexus.YorkU.CA> shields@yunexus.YorkU.CA (Paul Shields) writes:
>
>It's time to write into law that software warranties give the user
>some form of support, as for example the GNU license.

Yeah, right.  Let's get the guvvinment involved.  Hoo boy, we can create a
giant bureaucracy and have a billion dollar budget.  Hey, this should be
cabinet level, don't you think?  Yeah, that's the ticket: Secratary of
Software.

-wilkes <wilkes@mips.com>

davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (09/13/90)

In article <9491@ubc-cs.UUCP> rlin@cs.ubc.ca (Robert Lin) writes:
| Is it really true, that a free product like GNU would have no support?
| No customer hand-holding? 

  Well, if you have $100k/year for support, Cygnus will support most of
the GNU stuff. The company was formed by Michael Tieman, John Gilmore,
and (I'm sorry, brian offline tonight).

  For the average person, well... you have the source, right?
-- 
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