Well...since you almost asked J...
We tried to renew on time, but the quote we got was much higher than expected. The year before, we purchased 2 additional licenses and did some sort of pro-rating on the others so our list of products was a jumbled mix of renewals, pro-rated maintenance, and new purchases. Throw in the fact that we had academic pricing with a different set of SKUs and the fact that they changed their product line (2.x to 3.x) and it made for a difficult to decipher quote. I asked them to check why the quote was so much higher, than the year before. We had some back and forth and eventually I grew tired of messing with it, other things came up, and the issue was generally forgotten. Fast forward a year and we started the process over. I got another quote that was too high (ignoring the back maintenance and reinstatement fees), but the difference was that I finally realized what happened - they were charging us for 8 licenses instead of 4. I tried explaining that if they had given us a correct quote in the first place, we wouldn't be in this position, but that I wasn't about to pay for a year of maintenance that we never used. So here we are today. I would normally be up for renewal in April. I guess I'll start over then. However, Hyper-V is sounding more appealing all the time. From: Sherry Abercrombie [mailto:saber...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:48 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Rediculous Support Clause If you do not renew your support/maintenance contract this is the exact kind of response I would expect from a vendor. It is typically very well worth the money to keep those kinds of contracts renewed. Even if you don't need the support, the maintenance part of it will more than cover the cost of purchasing new versions of software. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Crawford, Scott < crawfo...@evangel.edu> wrote: I didn't renew. 3.5 is working well enough for us and Hyper-V, while certainly less feature rich, may very well be good enough now. I plan to start playing with it soon. From: Kelsey, John [mailto:jckel...@drmc.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 10:59 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Rediculous Support Clause VMWare did the exact same thing to us. We were out of support when we wanted to go to VSphere 4. Had to pay the previous year's support before we could upgrade, essentially paying for an entire year of support that we never used or needed. Highway robbery! ******************************* John C. Kelsey DuBois Regional Medical Center (: 814.375.3073 *: jckel...@drmc.org <mailto:jckel...@drmc.org> ******************************* -----Original Message----- From: Crawford, Scott [mailto:crawfo...@evangel.edu] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 20:30 To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Rediculous Support Clause And the ones that tax the system should pay more. Maybe we should make this discussion political J What product are we talking about btw? I know VMWare tried to pull this same thing on us. From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 6:28 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Rediculous Support Clause And for every customer that doesn't need/use support, there are 5 that tax the system. It tends to balance out. -ASB: http://xeesm.com/AndrewBaker Sent from my Verizon Smartphone ________________________________ From: Jeff Johnson <jjohn...@hydraflowusa.com> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:24:06 -0800 To: NT System Admin Issues< ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> Subject: RE: Rediculous Support Clause Unfortunately that may be true, but they have a great product and it is VERY stable. We did not renew our support with them after we had it for 3 years, because we never needed it. Three years later when we wanted to upgrade to a current version, we got hit with 3 years of past support plus the current year and one additional year, even though we never needed a darn thing. Again, it is time to renew, but we have no plans on using the support for another 3+ years. Ugh! Jeff Johnson Systems Administrator 714-773-2600 Office 714-773-6351 Fax From: Gary Whitten [mailto:li...@undiscoveredworlds.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Rediculous Support Clause Sounds like 'We have you where we want you so we can dictate terms'. I don't understand why you think it wouldn't be legal as nothing says they have to reinstate you at all. Playing Devil's Advocate here, it's highly likely that if you're in a position to need to be reinstated, it's because something has gone wrong and is likely to be expensive for them. ________________________________ From: Jeff Johnson [mailto:jjohn...@hydraflowusa.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 5:59 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: OT: Rediculous Support Clause Here is a clause in an agreement that I have never understood nor agreed with. I am curious if it is even legal??? In the event You desire support to be reinstated following expiration, You agree: 1) to pay a reinstatement fee equal to the current annual support fee and any unpaid support fees from the date of expiration to the date of reinstatement; and 2) to pay for at least one additional year of support services from the date of reinstatement. Jeff Johnson Systems Administrator 714-773-2600 Office 714-773-6351 Fax This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. -- Sherry Abercrombie "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
<<image001.jpg>>
