Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!att!laidbak!obdient!simon!steve
From: steve@simon.UUCP (Steven E. Piette)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: OS Updates and Solution Suppliers
Message-ID: <358@simon.UUCP>
Date: 6 Sep 89 03:59:16 GMT
References: <8908181731.AA15625@umix.cc.umich.edu> <45458f3d.b617@bear.engin.umich.edu>
Organization: ACT, Inc., Dank Dark Cave, Algonquin, IL.
Lines: 55

In article <45458f3d.b617@bear.engin.umich.edu>, stealth@caen.engin.umich.edu (Mike Peltier) writes:
> In article <8908181731.AA15625@umix.cc.umich.edu> FERGUSON@TMASL.EXXON.COM writes:
> >Whenever Apollo makes these radical OS changes, there's a HUGE (capital H)
> >time lag before the third party software/peripheral vendors bother to
> >come out with a new revision of their support software. For instance:
> >  [examples deleted]
> 
> Perhaps the developers need to be briefed ahead of time about the impending
> changes to the operating system, and have the opportunity to use and explore
> the new verion before it is released to the public, instead of at the same
> time.  Software revision takes time, I don't think it's just a matter of
> the developers sitting on their duffs all day.
> 
Apollo did just that in preperation for the release of SR10.

Back in August 2 years ago (Or was it three) they held one of the first
conferences on SR10 for the solution suppliers as part of the ATQP.

Many of the third partys had already had alpha and beta copies of SR10 and
were busy porting for the DN1000 which required SR10 as a base level OS.

Included were a handfull of SE's from across the world who were trained along
with the third partys. We then provided many of the non-disclosure presentations
and early field technical support on both SR10 and the DN1000.

So, at least in the case of SR10 many software developers had pre-release 
software, time in the porting centers, and access to the engineers. 

What I say happen in many cases is that a vendor's development schedule didn't
line up well with the new software release schedule because of other hardware
platforms they supported, quality control cycles, and limited resources.

While I was at Apollo one of the biggest fustrations was customers who were
still running old releases of software, not just one release back mine you,
Now some was due to third party software issues, but lots were just due to
the same issues the third partys had; porting their software, QA, resources.
It was really difficult to remember the bugs and try and help these people
without sounding like a broken record in suggesting they upgrade. I mean does
anyone remember when the current 9.7 version of DOMAIN/IX (the 9.5 tape) was
released. (We're talking years now, though one would think in all that time
Apollo could have fixed all the bugs :-))

Before laying all the blame on Apollo let me ask are all of you running at
least one system with the latest version of software for testing and porting?.
My guess is no given the amount of 9.7 and whats in 10.x types of questions
seen in this newsgroup.

Again, Early access to software for the solution suppliers is only part of the
problem, They need external pressure in the form of customers requiring them
to maintain current releases of their software in order to sell it.
-- 
Steven E. Piette                              Applied Computer Technology Inc.
UUCP: {smarthost}!simon!steve                             1750 Riverwood Drive
INET: steve@simon.CHI.IL.US or spiette@SUN.COM             Algonquin, IL 60102
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------