Re: Upgrade versus update - trying to close the discussion
Hi, all, just to make it clear: I am not going to "rant" aynone on the licensing politics of a single company. I do not debate with Microsoft (any more), I have given up talking to Apple completely long time ago about developer support. I am sure this list wouldn't be as vivid as it is if Runrev wouldn't be partners people like to work with. I think the license sentence I quoted is clear. I completely agree that it's unlikely I can jump to V3 as my free upgrade, but it is also very likely that the software developer (Runrev) will take care of previous (but still active) versions and bugfix them, even if they have released an upgrade. Otherwise they would push customers of "actual-version-minus-2" out of line, if they didn't fix bugs in that version any more. So, to sum it up: I tried to express my confidence in Runrev being a customer oriented company. I don't have any doubts that they are, otherwise I would not have paid money for a program that I currently do not USE AT ALL. Of course I expect "industry standard care", so I expect bugs to be fixed FOR FREE without having me to pay for upgrades after I received a single bug fixing version. Since I haven't used Revolution up to more than a few crashes yet (Win XP), I cannot tell what my personal needings will be in the future and NATURALLY I will contact the software company directly, not discuss my own problems in public BEFORE doing so. I simply found it notable that the license explanation I got allowed me for one free upgrade without a limitation to the next upgrade being available. I know there are companies who have acted like this before, so I wanted to say "Thank you" for this fair policy. I don't know how often bugfixes appear, I would say this depends on the quality of the product. I have had crashes, so I guess a (free!) bugfix update is soon to be released anyway. Marc Albrecht A.C.T. / level-2 Glinder Str. 2 27432 Ebersdorf Deutschland Tel. 04765-830060 Fax. 04765-830064 ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Upgrade versus update
Hi, Doug, Of course, after a certain amount of time, expecting bug-fixes on older versions wouldn't be reasonable either. Every software product has a "supported lifetime". I agree. For example, if you found a bug in Windows 95, Microsoft would hardly be expected to provide a fix a this point in time. True. But Microsoft officially declares the product life time, so I always know what product I can insist being bug fixed on ;-) Marc Albrecht A.C.T. / level-2 Glinder Str. 2 27432 Ebersdorf Deutschland Tel. 04765-830060 Fax. 04765-830064 ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Upgrade versus update
True. But the KNOWN bugs reported during that timeframe should be fixed as an update NOT an upgrade. Kinda like when you buy a car (or a piece of hardware). If it breaks on the day before the warranty expires, you are entitled to a warranty repair and a reasonable time period thereafter to be certain that the warranty repair did actually fix the problem--typically repairs are warranted for 90 days following return of the defective item. It is quite reasonable IMHO to expect bugs documented and known to exist during the first year of a product's life to be covered by an IMPLICIT warranty, even in the absence of an explicit one. Software developers (whether RunRev or you or I) should honor this implicit warranty and fix the known bugs with patches or updates rather than obliging buyers to purchase an upgrade in order to get the bug-fixes. It's a moral obligation, even if it isn't a binding legal obligation--which it may or may not be (I'm not a lawyer). Marian On Mar 13, 2004, at 6:02 PM, Doug Lerner wrote: Of course, after a certain amount of time, expecting bug-fixes on older versions wouldn't be reasonable either. Every software product has a "supported lifetime". For example, if you found a bug in Windows 95, Microsoft would hardly be expected to provide a fix a this point in time. After a year or two following the major release of a software product, usually it's time to go on. Otherwise it becomes too expensive a product to support and sell and nobody could afford to buy it. doug On 3/14/04 7:56 AM, "Marian Petrides" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I couldn't agree more with all the points you made. Marian On Mar 13, 2004, at 5:56 PM, A.C.T. wrote: Hi, Marian, Ah, but what happens when those bug fixes come bundled with major feature enhancements? Is that an update or an upgrade? Sounds like an upgrade to me. That's an "upgrade", as it carries "major enhancements". Please don't get me wrong on this: I am willing to pay for "upgrades" (that I need) and I am expecting free "updates" where necessary! Now if a company decides to NOT bugfix their product "for free" for the honest customer the result - at least on the long run - will be: less customers. That's just what the market is like: The way you deal with your customers defines the way they deal with you. I have bought my license from Runrev because I think Revolution is a product that may help me creating some specific products. I haven't really started using it (as I really get headache from Transcript), so I cannot tell if I "need" an update or an upgrade right now :-) I like your idea about having a choice in which upgrade you want to take. I hope you'll post on this list what happens when you try to use your free upgrade to go from 2.x to 3.x, because I suspect this is an eventuality that RunRev had not anticipated and had not intended. Clever reading on your part! Well, that's just what the license says: "Your key is valid for the current release and one upgrade." It does not say "and the next upgrade available", it clearly says "and one upgrade". So it is my choice which upgrade I want to have for free: if there are major enhancements in the next version it's most likely that I choose that. If the next-plus-one version is two years ahead, it's very likely that I also choose the next version as well. But if the frequency of upgrades should be three/four a year, it's very likely that I do not upgrade to the very next but one of the following versions. According to the license that's what the key is for: "one free upgrade". I consider this a fair license and I am going to change some of my own licenses according to this idea. Back to "updates": Software nearly never ever is "bug-free". A cooperative way to keep your customers satisfied is handing out "patches" (or call them "updates"), because this shows: You do care for what you have done. That's true especially for companies that have limited resources: The smaller your budget is the more important it is to have satisfied customers (I tend to call them "partners") that are willing to pay for "real upgrades", because you fix the bugs you made in the product you sold them. Only big companies can allow themselves to ignore that they have made mistakes (do I need to name some?) and "sell every bugfix as an upgrade". From the cooperative side this leads to short-term partnerships, and it's up to the company to decide if they prefer that to long-term partnerships with customers/partners that pay for "real upgrades" because you care for your product. Marc Albrecht A.C.T. / level-2 Glinder Str. 2 27432 Ebersdorf Deutschland Tel. 04765-830060 Fax. 04765-830064 ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution This email has been
Re: Upgrade versus update
Of course, after a certain amount of time, expecting bug-fixes on older versions wouldn't be reasonable either. Every software product has a "supported lifetime". For example, if you found a bug in Windows 95, Microsoft would hardly be expected to provide a fix a this point in time. After a year or two following the major release of a software product, usually it's time to go on. Otherwise it becomes too expensive a product to support and sell and nobody could afford to buy it. doug On 3/14/04 7:56 AM, "Marian Petrides" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I couldn't agree more with all the points you made. > > Marian > On Mar 13, 2004, at 5:56 PM, A.C.T. wrote: > >> Hi, Marian, >> >>> Ah, but what happens when those bug fixes come bundled with major >>> feature enhancements? Is that an update or an upgrade? Sounds like >>> an upgrade to me. >> >> That's an "upgrade", as it carries "major enhancements". >> Please don't get me wrong on this: I am willing to pay for "upgrades" >> (that I need) and I am expecting free "updates" where necessary! >> >> Now if a company decides to NOT bugfix their product "for free" for >> the honest customer the result - at least on the long run - will be: >> less customers. That's just what the market is like: The way you deal >> with your customers defines the way they deal with you. I have bought >> my license from Runrev because I think Revolution is a product that >> may help me creating some specific products. I haven't really started >> using it (as I really get headache from Transcript), so I cannot tell >> if I "need" an update or an upgrade right now :-) >> >>> I like your idea about having a choice in which upgrade you want to >>> take. I hope you'll post on this list what happens when you try to >>> use your free upgrade to go from 2.x to 3.x, because I suspect this >>> is an eventuality that RunRev had not anticipated and had not >>> intended. Clever reading on your part! >> >> Well, that's just what the license says: "Your key is valid for the >> current release and one upgrade." It does not say "and the next >> upgrade available", it clearly says "and one upgrade". So it is my >> choice which upgrade I want to have for free: if there are major >> enhancements in the next version it's most likely that I choose that. >> If the next-plus-one version is two years ahead, it's very likely that >> I also choose the next version as well. But if the frequency of >> upgrades should be three/four a year, it's very likely that I do not >> upgrade to the very next but one of the following versions. According >> to the license that's what the key is for: "one free upgrade". I >> consider this a fair license and I am going to change some of my own >> licenses according to this idea. >> >> Back to "updates": Software nearly never ever is "bug-free". A >> cooperative way to keep your customers satisfied is handing out >> "patches" (or call them "updates"), because this shows: You do care >> for what you have done. That's true especially for companies that have >> limited resources: The smaller your budget is the more important it is >> to have satisfied customers (I tend to call them "partners") that are >> willing to pay for "real upgrades", because you fix the bugs you made >> in the product you sold them. Only big companies can allow themselves >> to ignore that they have made mistakes (do I need to name some?) and >> "sell every bugfix as an upgrade". From the cooperative side this >> leads to short-term partnerships, and it's up to the company to decide >> if they prefer that to long-term partnerships with customers/partners >> that pay for "real upgrades" because you care for your product. >> >> Marc Albrecht >> A.C.T. / level-2 >> Glinder Str. 2 >> 27432 Ebersdorf >> Deutschland >> Tel. 04765-830060 >> Fax. 04765-830064 >> >> ___ >> use-revolution mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution >> > > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > > This email has been screened by Engate Spam Sentinel ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Upgrade versus update
I couldn't agree more with all the points you made. Marian On Mar 13, 2004, at 5:56 PM, A.C.T. wrote: Hi, Marian, Ah, but what happens when those bug fixes come bundled with major feature enhancements? Is that an update or an upgrade? Sounds like an upgrade to me. That's an "upgrade", as it carries "major enhancements". Please don't get me wrong on this: I am willing to pay for "upgrades" (that I need) and I am expecting free "updates" where necessary! Now if a company decides to NOT bugfix their product "for free" for the honest customer the result - at least on the long run - will be: less customers. That's just what the market is like: The way you deal with your customers defines the way they deal with you. I have bought my license from Runrev because I think Revolution is a product that may help me creating some specific products. I haven't really started using it (as I really get headache from Transcript), so I cannot tell if I "need" an update or an upgrade right now :-) I like your idea about having a choice in which upgrade you want to take. I hope you'll post on this list what happens when you try to use your free upgrade to go from 2.x to 3.x, because I suspect this is an eventuality that RunRev had not anticipated and had not intended. Clever reading on your part! Well, that's just what the license says: "Your key is valid for the current release and one upgrade." It does not say "and the next upgrade available", it clearly says "and one upgrade". So it is my choice which upgrade I want to have for free: if there are major enhancements in the next version it's most likely that I choose that. If the next-plus-one version is two years ahead, it's very likely that I also choose the next version as well. But if the frequency of upgrades should be three/four a year, it's very likely that I do not upgrade to the very next but one of the following versions. According to the license that's what the key is for: "one free upgrade". I consider this a fair license and I am going to change some of my own licenses according to this idea. Back to "updates": Software nearly never ever is "bug-free". A cooperative way to keep your customers satisfied is handing out "patches" (or call them "updates"), because this shows: You do care for what you have done. That's true especially for companies that have limited resources: The smaller your budget is the more important it is to have satisfied customers (I tend to call them "partners") that are willing to pay for "real upgrades", because you fix the bugs you made in the product you sold them. Only big companies can allow themselves to ignore that they have made mistakes (do I need to name some?) and "sell every bugfix as an upgrade". From the cooperative side this leads to short-term partnerships, and it's up to the company to decide if they prefer that to long-term partnerships with customers/partners that pay for "real upgrades" because you care for your product. Marc Albrecht A.C.T. / level-2 Glinder Str. 2 27432 Ebersdorf Deutschland Tel. 04765-830060 Fax. 04765-830064 ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Upgrade versus update
Hi, Marian, Ah, but what happens when those bug fixes come bundled with major feature enhancements? Is that an update or an upgrade? Sounds like an upgrade to me. That's an "upgrade", as it carries "major enhancements". Please don't get me wrong on this: I am willing to pay for "upgrades" (that I need) and I am expecting free "updates" where necessary! Now if a company decides to NOT bugfix their product "for free" for the honest customer the result - at least on the long run - will be: less customers. That's just what the market is like: The way you deal with your customers defines the way they deal with you. I have bought my license from Runrev because I think Revolution is a product that may help me creating some specific products. I haven't really started using it (as I really get headache from Transcript), so I cannot tell if I "need" an update or an upgrade right now :-) I like your idea about having a choice in which upgrade you want to take. I hope you'll post on this list what happens when you try to use your free upgrade to go from 2.x to 3.x, because I suspect this is an eventuality that RunRev had not anticipated and had not intended. Clever reading on your part! Well, that's just what the license says: "Your key is valid for the current release and one upgrade." It does not say "and the next upgrade available", it clearly says "and one upgrade". So it is my choice which upgrade I want to have for free: if there are major enhancements in the next version it's most likely that I choose that. If the next-plus-one version is two years ahead, it's very likely that I also choose the next version as well. But if the frequency of upgrades should be three/four a year, it's very likely that I do not upgrade to the very next but one of the following versions. According to the license that's what the key is for: "one free upgrade". I consider this a fair license and I am going to change some of my own licenses according to this idea. Back to "updates": Software nearly never ever is "bug-free". A cooperative way to keep your customers satisfied is handing out "patches" (or call them "updates"), because this shows: You do care for what you have done. That's true especially for companies that have limited resources: The smaller your budget is the more important it is to have satisfied customers (I tend to call them "partners") that are willing to pay for "real upgrades", because you fix the bugs you made in the product you sold them. Only big companies can allow themselves to ignore that they have made mistakes (do I need to name some?) and "sell every bugfix as an upgrade". From the cooperative side this leads to short-term partnerships, and it's up to the company to decide if they prefer that to long-term partnerships with customers/partners that pay for "real upgrades" because you care for your product. Marc Albrecht A.C.T. / level-2 Glinder Str. 2 27432 Ebersdorf Deutschland Tel. 04765-830060 Fax. 04765-830064 ___ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
