6 May
1998
6 May
'98
2:25 a.m.
I understand the economic logic of no longer supporting products
that aren't being sold (aren't making money) and that are deemed
obsolete by being two generations behind today's products. But
at that point, the company has decided that any ill will caused
by this decision isn't worth the cost or aggravation of continued
support. Certainly some companies turn over continued support
to third parties - when the third party thinks there's some money
in it. But what about a non-profit organization for products that
absolutely no one wants to support? Just send them the docs
and let them archive them. Companies donate old office equipment
to good causes, why not old docs or source code?
- John
Jefferson Computer Museum <http://www.threedee.com/jcm>
6 May
6 May
3:55 a.m.
You know, this idea makes sense. But have a feeling that most
product managers (the guys most in the position to make these
decisions) are so far removed from the product, so intimidated by
the almighty 'Company Policy (tm)', (not to mention hair being way,
way too pointy) that even this will not get consideration.
Just my $0.02
I understand the economic logic of no longer
supporting products
that aren't being sold (aren't making money) and that are deemed
obsolete by being two generations behind today's products. But
at that point, the company has decided that any ill will caused
by this decision isn't worth the cost or aggravation of continued
support. Certainly some companies turn over continued support
to third parties - when the third party thinks there's some money
in it. But what about a non-profit organization for products that
absolutely no one wants to support? Just send them the docs
and let them archive them. Companies donate old office equipment
to good causes, why not old docs or source code?
- John
Jefferson Computer Museum <http://www.threedee.com/jcm>
6:36 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19980506/85576672/at…
12:03 p.m.
On Wed, 6 May 1998, Tony Duell wrote:
Well, I'm sure we all think that would be a Good
Thing, but just try
convincing companies of that.
IMHO, somebody should pass a law that says 'If a company refuses to
support a product, all documentation (schematics, sources, etc) should be
made available to owners of said product (or anyone :-))'. And with stiff
penalties for companies who loose documentation. It would be a lot more
use than some of the silly laws we have these days.
Alas none of us are in a position to pass laws...
-tony
At least not with an attitude like that.
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't blame me...I voted for Satan.
Coming in September...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
[Last web page update: 05/03/98]
9 May
9 May
6:22 p.m.
On 6 May 98 at 19:36, Tony Duell wrote:
I'll second both of these motions !
Unfortunately , all too often manufacturers (and software houses)
are in it for the quick buck, and abandon the product as soon as there
is no longer (in their opinion) adequate return. But they will sit on their
copyrights and prevent any use or improvement of the product. Many
never even back up their product with parts, docs etc.in the first place. I
seem to remember that auto-manufacturers had to supply parts for a certain
number of years after production. This should be built in to copyright
protection, which could make copyright documentation available after Xn period
of time if products (or ideas for that matter) were not supported or available
. The infamous Atari ST Freeze-Dried Terminal program incident comes to mind
here as well as those of Broderbund, Symantec ,et al, sell-offs to other
companies and disclaiming any further responsabilities. IBM has been one of the
best for support (if somewhat pricey) and now has discontinued support for PS2
and PS1 computers.Then in this case they should also have to give up rights to
MCA so that 3rd party developers could continue development.
This way consumers would also have some protection and these companies would
not be so quick to abandon them. It would also provide more of a barier against
shoddy manufacturing practices .
Rant mode off.
ciao larry
lwalker(a)interlog.com
in it. But
what about a non-profit organization for products that
absolutely no one wants to support? Just send them the docs
and let them archive them. Companies donate old office equipment
to good causes, why not old docs or source code?
Well, I'm sure we all think that would be a Good Thing, but just try
convincing companies of that.
IMHO, somebody should pass a law that says 'If a company refuses to
support a product, all documentation (schematics, sources, etc) should be
made available to owners of said product (or anyone :-))'. And with stiff
penalties for companies who loose documentation. It would be a lot more
use than some of the silly laws we have these days.
Alas none of us are in a position to pass laws...
9676
days inactive
9680
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
dastar＠wco.com -
Jeff.Kaneko＠ifrsys.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
lwalker＠mail.interlog.com