On 06/19/2013 07:24 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Or when they insisted on increasing our workload by only giving temporary keys repeatedly when there was a change in licensing terms that required renegotiation and corporate management re-approval, which invariably added a month or so to the license renewal process. One would think that after you had been a paying customer for a decade and there was no historical basis to suggest negotiation in bad faith or that a contract would not eventually be signed that vendors would be less rigid. The low risk that such a customer would use the product for another license term without paying would seem justification for not deliberately aggravating the customer by implying lack of trust on the vendors side. It's an accumulation of things like that that predisposes one to look for alternative vendors.In <b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0e0c...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com>, on 06/19/2013 at 09:17 AM, Phil Smith <p...@voltage.com> said:So this is a slightly different topic, but it's been my experience that CPUIDs ("keys", whatever you want to call 'em) are more trouble than they're worth.Especially when the vendor fails to provide corrected/updated keys within the contracted period.
-- Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR jcew...@acm.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
