Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!paperboy!osf!chinn
From: chinn@osf.osf.org (David Chinn)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: strange support of OSF/Motif
Message-ID: <3780@paperboy.OSF.ORG>
Date: 15 Feb 90 17:07:53 GMT
Sender: news@OSF.ORG
Lines: 83


In article <927@pan.UUCP>, jw@pan.UUCP (Jamie Watson) writes:
>- - There are two different support contracts.

true.

>  . "Technology", cost $1500/yr, includes updates only - no direct
>    contact with anyone at OSF for bug reporting or fixes.

$1500/yr (the technology update service) does not preclude
one from reporting bugs.  One may report bugs without a support contract
of any type. 

As far as "direct contact" we request that our full service customers
submit bug reports via electronic mail as well, but we don't require it.

>  . "Full Service", cost $2500/yr, includes updates *and* direct
>    contact with people at OSF for bug reporting and fixes.

$2500/yr (full service) provides you with an engineer who can help
you to isolate a fault, answer your questions regarding how to use
stuff, help ferret out problems in the motif code.  (we still request 
that you submit the bug electronically, but do not require it). 

Additionally, this service gives you the right to escalate an issue.  
If you have a problem, and we tell you that it will be fixed in some 
future release, and this is not acceptable to you, we will work with 
you to try to get you a solution in a time frame which *is* acceptable 
to you.

>- - The Motif bugs mailing list, which I believe has previously been
>  available to anyone with a Motif license, will only by available
>  to those with "Full Service" contracts.

There has never been a bugs mailing list for OSF/Motif.  There exists
an address 'motif-defects' (which is aliased to a person) to which
anybody can e-mail bug reports.

>- - These contract only include updates to the particular release that
>  you have licensed from OSF - that is currently 1.0; so they would
>  include future equivalents to the 1.0.1 and 1.0.A updates, which
>  I received *without* such a contract.  They do *NOT* include major
>  new releases, such as the (rumored) upcoming 1.1 (V11R4 compatible)
>  release.  Major new releases will have to be relicensed, at whatever
>  the normal price is (i.e. $1000 if they don't raise the price).
 
In terms of updates, 1.1 will be included, as well as
1.2 and any other 1.X which comes out withing the term of the 
agreement.  Don't forget the patch releases and other bug fixes (as
they come available) as well.

>I find this to be a very surprising policy.  First, the cost of these
>support contracts relative to the original cost of the product seems
>quite high to me.  Second, limiting membership on the bug mailing list
>to those who have support contracts seems rather unreasonable.  Third,
>and most important, charging such high fees and then *not* providing
>major new releases seems absolutely ridiculous.

1) I don't believe the fees are high at all.  This, however is an
opinion (the only opinion expressed in this missive).

2) see above

3) ditto

>By the way, there was some discussion in this group a while ago about
>the OSF actively discouraging people from reporting bugs and fixes to
>Motif code here.  I wonder if that is related at all to this support
>policy; perhaps they want to prevent people from helping each other
>in a free forum such as this, to try to force them to pay for support
>from OSF?

The reason we discourage people from reporting bugs and fixes in this
public forum is that OSF/Motif is not public domain software. Our 
lawyers inform us that, should source to Motif appear in public
forums, Motif will move (against our will) into the public domain.  

						thanks very much

UUCP:  ...uunet!osf.org!chinn                        david m chinn
ARPA:  chinn@osf.org                           Open Software Foundation

DISCLAIMER: I'm not even sure I agree with my *own* opinions!