Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!brchh104!brchs1!bnr.ca!rice.edu!sun-spots-request
From: ehrlich@cs.psu.edu (Dan Ehrlich)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun
Subject: Re: Yearly Fees for Support of Compilers
Keywords: No Digest Subjects in Unmoderated Mode
Message-ID: <3667@brchh104.bnr.ca>
Date: 5 Jun 91 14:17:00 GMT
Sender: news@brchh104.bnr.ca
Organization: Sunspots, Pseudo-Unmoderated
Lines: 51
Approved: sun-spots@rice.edu
X-Original-Date:    Thu, 30 May 1991 15:50:43 -0400

In article <2880@brchh104.bnr.ca> simon@bowfin.cs.washington.edu (Kevin Simonson) writes:

KS> X-Original-Date: Fri, 3 May 91 10:29:00 -0659
KS> X-Sun-Spots-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 102, message 12
KS> X-Note: Submissions: sun-spots@rice.edu, Admin: sun-spots-request@rice.edu

KS> I posted an article just a few days back about a problem getting the
KS> vendor that sold us (the University of Washington) an Ada compiler for our
KS> Sun 4, to look into a suspected bug in that compiler.  It turns out this
KS> company DOES support its compilers, but only if we pay for that support, a
KS> fee every year, apparently just in case there are bugs in the company's
KS> compiler that its programmers overlooked.

KS> Does anyone know if this is common?  Are there companies that instead of
KS> charging a "compiler insurance" yearly fee, will just sell people their
KS> compiler and will look into suspected bugs without charging a yearly fee?

Yes it is common.  Most software vendors will be happy to sell you an annual
software maintenance agreement.  These tend to be for more money than most
users think they are worth, but you usually get 'free' software upgrades
when the vendor finally gets around to fixing the bugs.  If you look at it
from the vendor's side one can justify some amount for a maintenance
contract.  The user almost always gets the short end of the deal on these as
most vendors take forever to fix bugs reported by their users.  This goes
for all software, not just compilers.  Your insurance analogy is valid, you
pay in big bucks and get very little back for your money.

KS> I can understand human error in coding the compilers, but it seems to me
KS> that such error shouldn't have to be payed for by the people using the
KS> compiler.

I agree.  But then how would a software vendor justify the 200+ persons who
do the software maintenace on their products?  :-)

KS> I got a number of responses to my previous article from people who
KS> suggested companies that sell Sun 4 Ada compilers.  I appreciate those re-
KS> sponses and will check with each individually to see if they provide sup-
KS> port without charging yearly for it.  But I thought I would post this in
KS> case "compiler insurance" turns out to be a necessary evil that somebody
KS> can tell me I have to live with.

Good luck in your search.  I doubt you will find a vendor who will support
you for free.  Would you prefer if they charged say $200,000 up front with
free support?

KS>                                       ---Kevin Simonson

--
Dan Ehrlich - Sr. Systems Programmer - Penn State Computer Science
<ehrlich@cs.psu.edu>/Voice: +1 814 863 1142/FAX: +1 814 865 3176