OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm 
having.

Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements 
are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.

A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to 
those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it at 
a per-seat license.

Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on 
maintenance, or not?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm
> having.
>
> Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements
> are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.

Sounds like most of our CAD software here...

> A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to
> those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it at
> a per-seat license.
>
> Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on
> maintenance, or not?

Given that advertisers are allowed to use phrases like "buy 1 get 1 
free" or "a free drink with any meal" then I'd say it's "free with an 
active maintenance contract". Saying it's free without any restrictions 
would be misleading (a restaurant can't advertise free drinks without 
mentioning the fact you need to buy a meal first).

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:45:59 +0000, scott wrote:

>> OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm
>> having.
>>
>> Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements
>> are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.
> 
> Sounds like most of our CAD software here...
> 
>> A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to
>> those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it
>> at a per-seat license.
>>
>> Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on
>> maintenance, or not?
> 
> Given that advertisers are allowed to use phrases like "buy 1 get 1
> free" or "a free drink with any meal" then I'd say it's "free with an
> active maintenance contract". Saying it's free without any restrictions
> would be misleading (a restaurant can't advertise free drinks without
> mentioning the fact you need to buy a meal first).

Thanks for the feedback, Scott.  I'm going to hold off on my opinion 
until I get a few more replies, because I don't want to influence the 
responses. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 22/03/2013 3:45 PM, scott wrote:
>
> Given that advertisers are allowed to use phrases like "buy 1 get 1
> free" or "a free drink with any meal" then I'd say it's "free with an
> active maintenance contract". Saying it's free without any restrictions
> would be misleading (a restaurant can't advertise free drinks without
> mentioning the fact you need to buy a meal first).

Succinctly put. I agree.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:45:59 +0000, scott wrote:

>> OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm
>> having.
>>
>> Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements
>> are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.
> 
> Sounds like most of our CAD software here...
> 
>> A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to
>> those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it
>> at a per-seat license.
>>
>> Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on
>> maintenance, or not?
> 
> Given that advertisers are allowed to use phrases like "buy 1 get 1
> free" or "a free drink with any meal" then I'd say it's "free with an
> active maintenance contract". Saying it's free without any restrictions
> would be misleading (a restaurant can't advertise free drinks without
> mentioning the fact you need to buy a meal first).

Follow-up question:

What about the phrasing "free for existing customers" when an "existing 
customer" is defined as "someone who pays their annual maintenance fees".

Do you see it as a fair/honest statement if you just say "free for 
existing customers" without defining what an existing customer is in the 
context of that discussion?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Le 22/03/2013 18:09, Jim Henderson nous fit lire :
> Follow-up question:
> 
> What about the phrasing "free for existing customers" when an "existing 
> customer" is defined as "someone who pays their annual maintenance fees".
> 
> Do you see it as a fair/honest statement if you just say "free for 
> existing customers" without defining what an existing customer is in the 
> context of that discussion?


I find it a bit dangerous.

Let's assume in 1995 I was not yet a customer.
On 1996, I became a customer with a 1 year maintenance, and did not

Did I cease to exist: no.

So, Dear Mr & Mrs Judges of the High Court, I'm a customer, I'm
existing, therefore their modules should have been free for me.


The usual sentence is something along: "free for customers with active
maintenance subscription at the date of release."

Notice the "at the date of release", it means one cannot just subscript
6 months later to the minimal set and hope to get the module for free.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 19:03:37 +0100, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> Did I cease to exist: no.

The question isn't really about whether the customer "exists", but rather 
whether they are a "current" customer (that phrasing was a poor choice of 
words on my part in trying to explain the situation).

The idea being that "I'm a customer with a maintenance agreement that's  
paid for and in force for this particular timeframe."

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Given that advertisers are allowed to use phrases like "buy 1 get 1
>> free" or "a free drink with any meal" then I'd say it's "free with an
>> active maintenance contract". Saying it's free without any restrictions
>> would be misleading (a restaurant can't advertise free drinks without
>> mentioning the fact you need to buy a meal first).
>
> Follow-up question:
>
> What about the phrasing "free for existing customers" when an "existing
> customer" is defined as "someone who pays their annual maintenance fees".

That sounds fine to me.

> Do you see it as a fair/honest statement if you just say "free for
> existing customers" without defining what an existing customer is in the
> context of that discussion?

A bit tricky and ambiguous, I'd prefer "free for current customers". IME 
some licenses require you to pay the maintenance fee only to be eligible 
for updates (you can carry on legally using the software without 
paying), in that case you could argue you are an existing customer even 
though you are not paying maintenance.

If the license requires you to pay the fee to even use the software (ie 
you have to stop using it when you cease paying maintenance) then I 
think your wording is fine.

Post a reply to this message

On 22-3-2013 16:31, Jim Henderson wrote:
> OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm
> having.
>
> Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements
> are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.
>
> A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to
> those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it at
> a per-seat license.
>
> Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on
> maintenance, or not?

There is "no additional cost" which is not the same as "no cost".



-- 
Women are the canaries of science. When they are underrepresented
it is a strong indication that non-scientific factors play a role
and the concentration of incorruptible scientists is also too low

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:24:14 +0100, andrel wrote:

> On 22-3-2013 16:31, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> OK, I need the opinion of a few folks disconnected from a debate I'm
>> having.
>>
>> Let's say you have a software product, and updates/support/enhancements
>> are provided only if you pay an annual "maintenance" fee.
>>
>> A new component is developed for the software, and is made available to
>> those on a current maintenance plan.  Other customers can purchase it
>> at a per-seat license.
>>
>> Is that new component "free" (as in "no cost") to those who are on
>> maintenance, or not?
> 
> There is "no additional cost" which is not the same as "no cost".

True. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message