[Info-vax] vax vms licenses

[Bill Gunshannon]

On 4/26/22 10:45, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 4/26/2022 7:04 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 4/25/22 22:37, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> On 4/25/2022 1:20 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> On 2022-04-22, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>>> On 4/22/2022 1:46 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I keep wondering if VSI has gone for a policy of short-term income at
>>>>>> the expense of damaging long-term income and I hope that isn't the 
>>>>>> case.
>>>>>
>>>>> They have obviously intended the opposite: they want to convert
>>>>> short term one time revenue to long term recurring revenue.
>>>>>
>>>>> How it actually works out is to be seen.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The alternative viewpoint is that their short-term aggressive licence
>>>> policies could be scaring off VMS the customers who would have made up
>>>> their long-term income.
>>>>
>>>> Simon.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What if a number of VMS customers, currently with support contracts, 
>>> just
>>> declared "no, we won't accept that"?  Do you really think VSI would 
>>> let them
>>> just walk?
>>>
>>
>> Are you saying that VSI would give some people a better deal while the
>> majority would be stuck with the original plan?  You don't think that
>> would drive them away?
>>
>> bill
>>
> 
> Standard customer rules:
> 
> 1) The customer is always right.
> 
> 2) When customer is wrong, refer to rule #1.
> 

Where's the tongue-in-cheek emoji?
You can't possibly be that naive.

If that were true we would still be buying from DEC or at the very
least HP would still be pushing VMS.

bill