|
|
Am 01.08.2015 um 01:09 schrieb Jim Henderson:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 19:47:14 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> Selling "support" also works. Provided you have the staff to actually
>> deliver support.
>
> The problem with this is that if you're selling support, your product is
> poorly designed and difficult to use.
>
> If you're a software company that depends on support and training as
> bottom-line revenue figures, you're doing software wrong IMHO.
Support := help with operating the software in conditions not
anticipated during the design.
Nothing wrong with that in my book, provided the company isn't shifting
costs from the design phase to the support phase.
Sample case: A big company I worked for some day realized that they were
growing out of the version control system they were using; apparently
the system was designed (and purchased) for a much smaller number of
projects and consequently a much smaller number of changes than what was
by now happening at that company, and was now running out of IDs for the
changes. The software company provided support by shipping a
custom-tailored build of the software using larger data fields for those
IDs.
Also, there are types of software - most notably any non-trivial
business software - where unanticipated operating conditions are the
norm; no two companies of any significant size have the same business
processes. Therefore, standard business software is designed to be
adapted for each individual customer, but this adaptation process is
non-trivial because of the flexibility the software offers.
Some software companies seem to be able to provide this level of support
free of charge, but I have no problem with software companies covering
the costs for this type of post-sale development by selling service
agreements.
But of course if you define support := user-driven on-demand training of
individual end users in how the software is supposed to work, then yes,
if that's your business model then you're certainly doing something wrong.
Post a reply to this message
|
|