Mark,

<< I'm not the one who offered unlimited support for the price paid. You
did. >>

Where do you see the word "unlimited" ?  Where do we state that we intend to
provide support for a product forever ?  Where in our history as a company
do you see us continuing to support products that have been discontinued ?
We didn't do it with 1.x, 2.x, or 3.x, so what makes you believe that we
would do it for 4.x ?

<< Then discontinue it. To continue to fix it but make those of us who have
already paid for it pay again is unethical; yes I said it again. Take it
however you want to. >>

I'm not *making* you do anything.  If you don't want to continue with the
product, then don't.  This is your choice, not ours, so don't try to place
the blame on our shoulders because we're trying to accomodate customers that
want to continue on with DBISAM.

<< I never read anything in the agreements you produced about giving you
both loyalty and money for your products. Loyalty is something you earn (and
throwaway apparently), not purchase or bargain for. >>

Mark, you are talking out your rear, and I suggest that you quit while
you're ahead.  If you continue on with insulting remarks directed towards
us, I will have no choice but to remove you as a customer and send those
refund checks immediately.  In spite of what you say, we have dealt with
your fairly and reasonably over the years.  The fact that you can't come to
grips with paying $59 for a year of extended support for DBISAM is your own
personal issue that you have to deal with, and these newsgroups are not the
place to continue with such an endeavor.

<< If you are asking for additional money for something you already sold,
you are, in fact, asking for additional compensation. I don't see how it can
be taken any other way. >>

My God man, are you slow ?  For the last time, you already received what you
paid for.  You didn't pay for support for the rest of your life, but for the
life of the product.  Well, that product life is coming to and end, and
those that wish to continue on with support *past* that product life will be
required to pay for such support.

<< You didn't sit down 4 years ago and calculate the value of DBISAM 4.x
based upon how long it would be in service. To do so now, in retrospect, is
asinine. >>

How do *you* know *anything* about what we decided or discussed ?  The
answer is you don't, so stop pretending to know anything about how we run
our business.  We calculate the product prices based upon a serviceable
lifetime of around 2-3 years, max.  DBISAM 4.x has already gone past that
lifetime by almost 2 years.

<< DBISAM is giving me no more and no less valuable service today than it
was 4 years ago when I bought it. Time of use has nothing to do with it. >>

That's bullshit, and you know it.  It costs us money every day to keep these
newsgroups, web site, etc. going, and all of those things are used for
support, not development.  Time of use has everything to do with product
support and product lifetimes.

<< I would have thought the same of DBISAM if it had cost me 100 times the
original purchase price. I don't sit down everyday and think, "Wow! Y is
only costing me $x per day. What a great value!" And I surely don't say "You
know, this is such a great daily value, I'll send him some more money!" >>

You started this thread with the sole purpose of being a jerk about the new
support plans, and you've succeeded beautifully.  It is now readily apparent
to all that you are doing this out of some desperate need to draw attention
to yourself.  You could have approached this in many different ways, but you
chose to publicly call us unethical and proceed to carry on this discussion
long past when I gave you an explanation and our official position.

<< I already said I wouldn't. But don't accuse me of saying things I didn't
say. I never said you ripped me off. In fact, if you would take the time to
re-read my previous post, you'll probably find that I said that I would have
paid a *MORE* for DBISAM if you had asked for it when I bought it. You set
the price, not me. >>

Perhaps someday it will dawn on you and you'll have an inkling of an
understanding as to what I'm talking about.  I'm not holding my breath,
however.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

Mark

> If your scenario was actually what was being proposed, I would evaluate
> how the changes would affect my software and make a determination on

What changes? I said "no further development".

> I'm not asking for new enhancements for free. I'm simply asking for the

In my opinion, you are. But that's only my personal opinion, of course.

> What is your opinion on this very scenario?
That's exactly what happned with v1, v2 and v3, so why not v4 ?

Support plans are optional, so I don't see any problems here.
Personally, I did't yet decide if I will buy DBISAM support plan or not, but
I'm glad I can chose.
To me, the existence of a paid support plan for dbisam means that I can
decide when to upgrade to EDB because now I have the option to "extend"
dbisam life, if I want to. We have more options than we had before so I
can't understand how can you consider this "unethical". I think you are not
being fair.

--
Fernando Dias

Mark,

<< Isn't that essentially what Tim has said, except that now, for those who
have already paid for it once, will now have to pay again for bug fixes? >>

No, it is most certainly not what I have said, and if you continue to
mischaracterize the support plans as such, I will ban you from these
newsgroups.  I do not have the time nor the energy to spend day after day
here dealing with your personal issues with the new support plans.

You need to get something straight and get it straight quickly - these
newsgroups are the property of Elevate Software, Inc.  They are not your
personal venting platform on which to try to embarrass or disparage us.

<< I'm not asking for new enhancements for free. I'm simply asking for the
deal I agreed to when I purchased the software, which was that minor
releases would be covered under the original purchase price. I, and I
believe most people, expect minor releases to cover bug fixes in the
original functionality as sold in the major version release I purchased, but
if Tim wants to include enhancements as well, then that is up to him. >>

How about we call the next release of DBISAM version 5.0 and charge $59 and
$99 for the STD and CS products, respectively ?  Would that make you happy ?
Well, guess what ?  It's the *exact same thing* that we're doing now, except
that we're just being honest about the fact that DBISAM isn't going to have
any new features worthy of a major upgrade.

--
Tim Young
Elevate Software
www.elevatesoft.com

In article <245A39EE-4724-4B61-92EE-B285E5F31826@news.elevatesoft.com>,
Mark A. Andrews wrote:
> Isn't that essentially what Tim has said, except that now, for those who
> have already paid for it once, will now have to pay again for bug fixes?
>
> I'm not asking for new enhancements for free. I'm simply asking for the
> deal I agreed to when I purchased the software, which was that minor
> releases would be covered under the original purchase price. I, and I
> believe most people, expect minor releases to cover bug fixes in the
> original functionality as sold in the major version release I purchased,
> but if Tim wants to include enhancements as well, then that is up to him.

The worst option, in software and lots of other things, is having a
supplier who goes out of business because they're not making any money.
Which would be the more ethical: pulling DBISAM because it's no longer
earning money and is a distraction from EDB, thus leaving us with an
unsupported product, or doing what Tim has done, ensuring that we can look
forward to it being actively (not passively) supported for a good while
yet. I've already signed up and was more than happy to do so.

--
Tony Bryer   SDA UK   'Software to build on'   www.sda.co.uk

Tim,

We are at an impasse. A lot of things have been said that we will both
regret as time passes. I am not going to respond publicly any longer.

I appreciate your efforts, but we'll just have to disagree. I will not
be purchasing a support contract for DBISAM 4.x.

I will be sending you a private email shortly. Please believe that it
will not be an unpleasant exchange, so don't be afraid to open it.

Mark

Mark


I have been watching this thread with more and more amazement. I'm an awkward sod (Tim can support that statement) but I try to be so in a what is to me a constructive fashion. You seem to be trying to be either destructive or obnoxious.

I particularly take exception to suggesting Tim is unethical. I think that with the whole issue Tim has been professional and ethical. Lets just run the history:

Well before ElevateDB comes out Tim make it clear it won't be DBISAM 5 - the changes are to great - and once ElevateDB is out then at some point DBISAM will be killed off

ElevateDB comes out

Tim suggests removing support from ElevateDB from the older Delphi's

The users scream

Tim listens and agrees to keep D5 onwards alive

Tim asks why people haven't made the transition to ElevateDB - I haven't seen the emails but the impression was purchase cost isn't the issue the switch to a different product with all the conversion hassles was - users suggest they'd pay for ongoing support

Tim agrees to the users request and accepts he will keep DBISAM going, but there will be a cost implication for the users (who've already said they're willing to pay)

That seems fairly ethical to me.

What Tim could have done, both now and in the past is declare a new major version for minor changes. He never has. Major versions have meant just that.

Again pretty ethical behaviour.

Lets now take your definition

2. being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or
practice, esp. the standards of a profession: eg. "It was not considered
ethical for physicians to advertise."

"standards of a profession" - yes I must admit Tim is unethical because:
- no vapourware
- no spin
- exceptional support
- good documentation
- listens to his customers

But is ethical because
- lousy calendar keeping

Think about it.

Roy Lambert

"Roy Lambert" <roy.lambert@skynet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:76927FEF-A0D5-4CD3-BBCE-1997EE5B4DC5@news.elevatesoft.com...
> Mark
>
> I particularly take exception to suggesting Tim is unethical. I think that
> with the whole issue Tim has been professional and ethical. Lets just run
> the history:
>

+1

>
> "standards of a profession" - yes I must admit Tim is unethical because:
> - no vapourware
> - no spin
> - exceptional support
> - good documentation
> - listens to his customers
>
> But is ethical because
> - lousy calendar keeping
>

+1

> I am not going to respond publicly any longer.

Thank you !!

In all seriousness, I can't quite follow your reasoning. In most cases, a
software version life comes to an end when the next version appears. It's a
common thing with software. In this case, version 4 of DBISAM is the last in
line, so it will have to end in a different way. Most vendors would just
kill it. Period. Tim, on the other hand, provide us with an option. I didn't
go for it, cause I am very happy with ElevateDB. For the record, I've been
using DBISAM since version 2 and just prepaid and upgraded to EDB v2 CS with
source. Why, because after all these years I can only conclude that Tim not
only delivers a good and solid product (with good documentation) but is also
very fair where it concerns upgrade prices. Let's take Symantec for example.
Every year a new version (and about 90% or more the same as previous
version) and their upgrade price is about 80% or more. And if you do not
upgrade Symantec software, do you really expect bug fixes 3-5 years after
initial release. I hope not, because you won't be getting any. In this
respect, Tim did things way differently. From 4.0 to 4.26 not only bug fixes
but numerous new features as well. All in all, for that price I would say
you got your money worth (ain't that the expression?).

As for the answer from Roy (who's making Tim getting gray hair well before
his time, just kidding Roy) he paints the picture pretty well. If his and
the other statements can't make you see that you are wrong in your
judgement, then too bad. Still, I think you are quite alone in your
reasoning.

And for the record, I am not a software developer. Just a hobbyist. You on
the other hand are, and as such makes money out of it. Most likely way more
than you ever paid for DBISAM. So what the heck are you complaining about?
In my view, you almost got it for free...

Fons Neelen
The Netherlands, Europe

Mark,

....being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or
practice, esp. the standards of a profession: eg. "It was not considered
ethical for physicians to advertise."

The ethics discussed in this definition involves licensed professionals
- doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, etc. Unethical behavior is
usually defined by code or standards of conduct and may or may not
involve moral issues. Violations of a professional code of ethics can
lead to sanctions or loss of license.

The definition of ethical in the ordinary sense implies moral wrongdoing
and it is therefore very offensive to call someone "unethical". You
obviously think the new support policy is unfair, but calling it
unethical is insulting and I think Tim is due an apology.

I should note that I can understand your initial expectation that minor
version number releases are free to a major version holder. I didn't go
back to read the license agreements to see if was a valid expectation
because version numbering is completely up to Tim it would have been
easy to end your licensed rights with a version number change at any
time. Tim explained why he wanted to leave the major numbering alone and
that explanation should have been sufficient to end the thread. It
should have certainly laid to rest the "fairness" of the changes. I
suspect that keeping version numbers consistent also saves Tim the
headache of adding an extra level to the build and download processes -
and more time for Tim benefits us all.


Sean

Fons


>And for the record, I am not a software developer. Just a hobbyist.

I am also a hobbyist in as much as my money making job is recruitment but I am a software developer as well, as a hobby

My other hobby is reading sf.

Roy Lambert