Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!dsac.dla.mil!dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil!nfs1675
From: nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice Upgrade
Keywords: Question about Lattice Support...
Message-ID: <2426@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil>
Date: 24 Aug 90 14:02:03 GMT
References: <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <590@oregon.oacis.org>
Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus
Lines: 42

In article <590@oregon.oacis.org>, jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org ( Staff OACIS) writes:
> In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes:
> >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice
> >product.  I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler,
> >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in
> >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free.  He said only
> >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the
> >customer money.  This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec.
> 
> The basic policy (which my no longer apply) could be thought of in terms
> of version digit change. Changes which involved the 2nd digit to the right
> of the decimal (e.g., 5.02 -> 5.04) were considered minor upgrades, usually
> involved mostly patches, and were distributed free. Changes involving the 1st
> digit over (5.0x -> 5.1x) were relatively major, usually involved major
> rewrites of a good portion of the product, and were distributed in "new product"
> form




I hadn't thought of it in these terms, but it sounds like SAS is being 
consistent with Lattice's numbering for revisions and updates. This release
sounds similar to the change from v3.03 to v3.10, and the numbering supports
it. Of course, I went from v3.03 to v4.0 anyway, but v3.10 sounded like a
major release.

I'm still not happy with having to either join BIX or pay $2.00 per minute
for technical support. It seems like it was implied in the past that the 
higher cost of utilities such as compilers, was to cover the cost of 
technical support. I still can't complain about the cost though, as long as
there are friendly helpful people here, and on CIS, so the technical support
isn't really needed. And maybe they will re-implement the BBS that Lattice
had, as they say they are considering.

---Mike,


-- 
A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg  DSAC-FSD
"However," replied the Universe,           | DLA Systems Automation Center
"The fact has not created in me a          | Columbus, Ohio
sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane       | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil  CIS: 73777,360