Login ProductsSalesSupportDownloadsAbout |
Home » Technical Support » DBISAM Technical Support » Support Forums » DBISAM General Discussion » View Thread |
Messages 31 to 40 of 47 total |
Paying for Bug Fixes Now? |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 2:11 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. timyoung@elevatesoft.com | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 2:17 PM | Permanent Link |
Fernando Dias Team Elevate | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 2:25 PM | Permanent Link |
Tim Young [Elevate Software] Elevate Software, Inc. timyoung@elevatesoft.com | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 2:54 PM | Permanent Link |
Tony Bryer | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 3:16 PM | Permanent Link |
"Mark A. Andrews" | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 3:16 PM | Permanent Link |
Roy Lambert NLH Associates Team Elevate | 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 3:21 PM | Permanent Link |
"Frans van Daalen" | "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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 4:23 PM | Permanent Link |
"Fons Neelen" | > 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 |
Tue, Mar 25 2008 4:35 PM | Permanent Link |
Sean McCall | 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 |
Wed, Mar 26 2008 5:37 AM | Permanent Link |
Roy Lambert NLH Associates Team Elevate | 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 |
« Previous Page | Page 4 of 5 | Next Page » |
Jump to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 |
This web page was last updated on Tuesday, May 7, 2024 at 06:25 PM | Privacy PolicySite Map © 2024 Elevate Software, Inc. All Rights Reserved Questions or comments ? E-mail us at info@elevatesoft.com |