SCO and filePro

[Fairlight]

Y'all catch dis heeyah?  Ron Kracht been jivin' 'bout like:
> 
> Let's see - how many companies have made official pronouncements about 
> changes in the cost of switching licenses for their products from SCO to 
> another platform since SCO's announcement?  I have seen exactly none.  
> But we are damned for not prominently announcing on our web site that 
> there has been no change in policy. If you consider that a reasonable 
> argument I'm not sure much discussion is possible.

No, you're not damned for not having a notice up just since the
announcement.  You're being called on (as a collective company) for
-someone- not stepping up to the plate and plainly answering the bloody
question that was put straight forward, and instead standing on ceremony by
insisting it should only be inquired about via a direct phone call or (now)
the official forum.

Let me bottom line this for you in simplest terms:

1) Question was asked.
2) You saw question.
3) Management can see question.
4) Nobody authoritative has given an answer worth a damn that isn't a 
side-step evasion or attempt to take it out of the public spotlight.
5) That's a problem, just like every other time it happens.

> You don't have to be an active user to check there for official 
> announcements.  Many of the companies whose commercial products I use 

I would have expected emails, more than likely.  Similar to the multiple
ones for the conference, releases, etc., that I get even though I've never
personally bought a single copy.  I signed up to download the demo once to
check something out and even aborted that when I decided it was easier to
just test on a client's system once I got permission.

You know, I'm not even sure those mails are CAN-SPAM Act compliant; they
don't have removal instructions included.  I could have sworn that was a
requirement of UCE under that legislation.

> response to user inquiries.  It's also not unusual for there to be user 
> supported forums that are more active than the official forums. It's 
> also common behavior for official notices to make their way to the user 
> forums when a participant posts information that was released on the 
> official forum. 

No it's not unusual.  Although the place is such a relative ghost town that
I'd have to wonder how long the propogation time would be.

> > Yeah, I'm guessing that's where the whole biometrics thing came about.
> > How's that workin' out for you folks?  :-/
> >   
> That is still to be determined. When you are willing to put up your 
> money then you will have earned the right to make snide comments.

Well no, I didn't buy an expensive product as a pet rock.  However, 12
years in business solo, going month to month without a firm, dependable,
fixed income is about as much a risk, considering what little I actually
do have rides on me making it work every month.  For me, it's the relative
equivalent as far as I'm concerned.  Why do people measure everything
by how -much- money you have or can put up?  For me, surviving alone is
enough of a test.  It's an equivalent risk scaled to my income bracket
and circumstances given my health and all.  That it's apparently supposed
to be a phallic size contest of who has more guts or money, rather than a
discussion about the principle of the correct way of doing things just says
something is seriously wrong with our society.  Apparently only the wealthy
have the right to criticise anything.

> I don't think you have seen a single word from conference marketing 
> about paying to make a presentation at the conference. That's something 
> I'd like to see you document.

Well, I'll document for you what I read.  I think I interpreted it
incorrectly, however, now that you call my attention back to it:

"
Vendor registration includes:
Access for one individual to the filePro Conference
The ability to include brochures, cds, etc. in the conference binder
Advertisement space on all conference electronic mailings
A table at the Vendor Showcase on Monday night
The vendor fee is $695.00.
"

I may have interpreted vendor and presenter as synonymous roles,
inaccurately.  If I did (I probably did, upon rereading it), I stand
corrected and also apologise for misconstruing things inadvertantly.

> That's interesting.  I know a number of people who have had the exact 
> opposite experience. You might think about whether your experience says 
> more about you than it does about Bud.

I don't dispute what anyone says their experiences have been with the man.
I'm not saying he's unpleasant at all.  The evening's discussion we had
went very well at the time, I thought.  And he -did- seem very receptive
and attentive at the time.  I'd not been agreed with so much in a long
time.  It's the big zero sum net changes that actually materialised as
a result of the discussions -he- initiated that tells me it was a waste
of time and effort on my part.  I'm not going to go any further into it
further than that.  The only reason he comes up at all in the discussion is
because nobody else will give a straight answer to a direct question that
the OP actually posed.

You know, considering that, maybe it -is- my problem, Ron.  I just honestly
flat-out have next to no patience for evasive, beaurocratic nonsense unless
I'm getting paid to put up with it.  I shoot straight, I'm up-front, I
don't dodge direct questions even when they're uncomfortable (ref above
response to my own erred reading of the conference mail), and I have this
annoying habit of expecting other people to act rationally likewise.  At
this moment, and on this subject, I'm not getting paid to put up with the
evasive beaurocratic responses.  So I'll just forget the frustration and
go spend my energy more constructively doing something else I consider
worthwhile.  The OP can fend for themselves.  Maybe they'll eventually get
an answer that tells us something.  If they do, I hope they share it with
the rest of the group--all of whom deserve to know the real answer.

The bottom line is that when someone asks me a reasonable, pertinent,
direct question that affects their business, I'm expected to give a direct
and substantive answer, not dodge or ignore it, nor make them jump through
formal hoops to get it.  Answers are what I'm paid for much of the time,
actually.  And I'm expected to deliver if I want to survive.  Apparently
that's not a valid expectation for anyone (including the OP) to have of
other companies.  Okay, I stand corrected again.  Sorry, I mistakenly
thought it was the proper way to do good business.

mark->
-- 
The latest synth mixdown...
http://media.fairlite.com/Isolation_Voiceless_Cry_Mix.mp3