Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!sgi!shinobu!odin!horus.esd.sgi.com!thant
From: thant@horus.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
Subject: Re: SGI UPGRADES/MAINTENANCE MONOPOLY
Message-ID: <1991Apr9.162537.711@odin.corp.sgi.com>
Date: 9 Apr 91 16:25:37 GMT
References: <1554@babcock.cerc.wvu.wvnet.edu> <1991Apr8.154643.29535@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Reply-To: thant@horus.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman)
Organization: sgi
Lines: 24

In article <1991Apr8.154643.29535@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, 1k1mgm@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Christopher Gunn) writes:

[...]

> It seems so clear to me that 'hostage' policies like you've posted
> gain companies a few disk sales and lose many more system sales;
> I wonder why they do this, particularly if it's basically an idle threat?

I don't work in support, and I don't speak for SGI, but I'm pretty 
sure that the refusal to support 3rd party equipment isn't an attempt
to gain a few disk sales.  

Silicon Graphics can't be expected to be experts on all third party 
hardware, and SG has no influence on its quality, how it is installed,
or how it interacts with SG equipment.  Refusing to support third 
party hardware is the only way SG can guarantee good service and 
good quality.

-- 
thant@sgi.com

The State, that is the coldest of all cold monsters.   Coldly, 
also, it lies, and the lie that creeps from its mouth is this:  
"I, the State, am the People."                     - Nietzsche