On Thursday 06 February 2003 03:38 am, James Sparenberg wrote: > On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 06:15, et wrote: > > I have noticed that Redhat, and M$ has lately published listing > > reguardiing expected support cycles, and all of them are shorter than > > what most people expect for manufactured products, but this is the way of > > things, and even more so with computers, since the hardware is planned to > > be obsolete in 3 to 4 years anyway. > > This is the sweet spot I'm talking about.... IF support cycles matched > hardware life it would be IMHO a better proposition. In other words > doing support life by series not by release. The the life cycle of the > series would more closely match the life of the hardware. The problem > now is to hit the sweet spot in Corporate world in such a way that they > want/need MDK's support and are willing to pay for it! Product life > cycle is cool. I still feel it's a little short. I think it is worth mentioning, (more for someone that is just looking thru the archives and comes across this thread) that the "support" we are talking about is actully package sucurity updates, and not "I just got given a Mandrake 7.2 cd, how do I get it installed" letters to the mail lists. I am pretty sure that those kinda questions will still get some attention, just not to be worried about by Mandrake Paid Employees.
> > James > > > the real problem (from my narrow little pinhole viewpoint) is > > the need for applications needing all the computing power available. > > while most companies got P3 M$ windows boxes, they still use them to > > emmulate access to a termanel off the server, or run word. stuff they > > could have done with the wyse monochrom termanal they threw away to have > > pretty colors. > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
