[Info-vax] VSI OpenVMS Community License

[bill]

On 3/28/2024 8:03 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
> In article <uu2dqu$35k4u$1 at dont-email.me>,
> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>> On 3/27/2024 9:03 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
>>> In article <utvdak$2bpcm$1 at dont-email.me>,
>>> Dave Froble  <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>>> Well, if it was/is that much work, then should that not indicate that there has
>>>> been plenty of interest?
>>>
>>> One would think!
>>>
>>>> And if so, why kill the goose that lays the golden eggs?
>>>
>>> I hate to be that guy, but...but it must be asked: were the eggs
>>> laid by that goose really all that golden?  Were they seeing any
>>> return on it?  My guess is, "no, not really."
>>
>> My perspective has been that anything that gets or keeps interest in VMS is a
>> good thing for VMS.
> 
> Fundamentally I agree with you, but with the caveat that those
> things must be tempered by their costs.  Here, I suspect VSI was
> faced with a cost that they didn't feel was worth it; they chose
> a path to address that, where you and I both agree that another
> path would have been superior.

What cost are we talking about here?  If you mean the cost of
taking in requests and sending out licenses I see no reason
why that could not have been fully automated.  It's not rocket
science (anymore) people.


bill