Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!wivax!cadmus!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!internet!Mike Muuss From: Mike Muuss Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Unix Bugs vs. VMS bugs Message-ID: <5914@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Mon, 19-Nov-84 22:07:12 EST Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.5914 Posted: Mon Nov 19 22:07:12 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 21-Nov-84 05:34:18 EST Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 62 Well, from my perspective, Berkeley (without trying to) has been providing Standard Vendor Support (SVS) for their software in a manner quite comparable to all other vendors, viz: *) Every N years ( N := {1, 2, 3} ) they come out with a new version of the system which is much better, and only breaks a few old programs, while delivering *substantial* new functionality. Standard Vendor Support. *) You can send them bug reports (SPRs, or whatever), and Bugs Bunny comes back and says, "Yup, that's a bug". Standard Vendor Support. *) You can call them on the phone, and they make rude noises and tell you to get lost. Standard Vendor Support. And, I don't fault them for it; it's what I expect from a Research organization. Basicly, my feeling is that you have to be prepared to take whatever software your vendor offers, and use it "as is", and be content (not happy, perhaps, just content), -OR- you have to be prepared to "roll your own", be that as simple as adding some other vendor packages, or as radical as cultivating one or more in-house wizards. There are, of course, "shades of grey", nothing is ever simple. IBM is perhaps the most responsible about giving people fixes to things incrementally; one IBM shop I know of used to get a DTR (distribution tape reel) of bug fixes every few days; you never bothered installing them unless you thought you had a bug you thought they had fixed. Just this level of activity consumed 1/2 a systems person; installing them ALL takes about 2 full time people (so local management claimed). There was no assurance that IBM would be fixing YOUR bug anytime soon; they usually moved at a majestic pace, so you could expect quite some delay. But that's OK, you could rest assured they would eventually fix your problem, although it may have to wait until the fabled Next Release. Most IBM users are content with this level of support; you get used to working around the bugs, and waiting for the next release. However, some IBM owners do cultivate local wizards, and you would be AMAZED at some of the marvelous things they could make those systems do! The power of true wizardry can be astonishing. I've picked IBM as my example above, because the computing culture tends to revere IBM systems as over-priced, highly reliable, and exceptionally well supported. But somehow, tending to associate myself with systems run by local wizards of the appropriate flavor, I have never been content with "Standard Vendor Support". In fact, those three words have become one of the more repulsive slogans I can call to mind. "Standard Vendor Support". Feel your jaw muscles tighten? Feel your blood pressure rising? I do. If you want something that's non-stock, be prepared to (a) languish, unsatisfied, or (b) deviate from Standard Vendor Support, and break out on your own. Generally, the question isn't whether to break out on your own at all, but how much, and in what direction. Onwards! -Mike