delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: opendos/1997/09/17/15:39:38

Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 15:37:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris AT blackwidow DOT saultc DOT on DOT ca>
To: Kurt Wall <kwall AT utw DOT com>
cc: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: For Sale or For Free: The Debate Continues
In-Reply-To: <199709110549.AAA19580@fly.HiWAAY.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970917150959.12102E-100000@capslock.com>
Organization: Capslock Computer Consulting
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Kurt Wall wrote:

> >I thought it would be great to have the sources for DOS, and thus became
> >interested in OpenDOS and helped spread the word about it.  I went to
> >great lengths to inform as many people about it as possible.  I spent a
> >considerable amount of time on several "opendos" mailing lists, including
> >the original one on tacoma, which later moved to delorie, as well as
> >caldera's own mailing lists.
> 
> We all have egg on our faces, perhaps.  I was not quite as vigorous as you,
> but
> I am nonetheless chagrined at the apparent Caldera turn-about.  I do not,
> however,
> believe they promised a full release of source code, just that source would
> be
> released.  I am far more interested in the kernel than the utility set,
> anyway. I
> would like the assembler and linker more...
> 
> -snippage-

They DID say that utility sources would be forthcoming. Period.
If they hadn't said that, then there would be NO "turn-about"
now would there?  I treat a statement of pending source code
release as a promise, and its negation is a broken promise.  You
don't need to "believe" anything.  Read the released "promises"
from Caldera and judge from that.  It's really very clear.

If they hadn't promised anything or led us to believe anything by
using DIRECT statements, then we wouldn't be mad about all of
this.

NOBODY was doing any assuming.  Just that we assumed Caldera
would keep their word.


> >Had I known from the start that the sources would never be publically
> >released, I'd have never spent any time with OD, never participated so
> >actively on the mailing lists, and never became such an advocate of it.
> 
> >Now I find myself going back to most of the people who I proudly bragged
> >about OD to (about the source code) and eating my words in embarrassment.
> 
> >Never again will I trust any commercial entity in this way again.  I will
> >never advocate something again that I don't have directly within my grasp.
> 
> So, what I hear is that you're embarassed.  Understandable, given the
> efforts
> you expended on Caldera's behalf.
> 
> -snippage-

Precicely.  I'm more upset about all of the time I've wasted on
OD now, and about giving Caldera free advertising through
advocacy.
 
> >Time is money.  I am owed something IMHO.  
> 
> Your time is money, but Caldera's time is not?

Sure, their time is money too, that is why Caldera sells OD
commercially - to make money.  Just because OpenDOS is free in
binary form doesn't make it OK for Caldera to mislead everyone.

Think about this:

Lets say that I wrote a fidgetmaker program, and throughout my
development I made the program freely available in Binary form,
and said that when the final release was ready, that I would
release the source code publically.  People are simply going to
take my word that "the source is forthcoming".  They may have
plans for fidgetmaking, and start using MY program now, knowing
that even though it isn't currently the best fidgetmaking
program, that the source will eventually be available for them to
customize.  Wow, the thought of a free fidgetmaker program, with
free source code!  They would start telling everyone they knew
that was also interested in fidgetmaking about this FREE program,
and that the source code is forthcoming.  Fidgetmaking is not
dead anymore!  Just use OpenFidget, the free fidgetmaker program.
In a couple months when it is released in full, the source will
be released too!

People who are interested in fidgetmaking will now become very
interested in OpenFidget, and will tell all of their fidgetmaking
friends about it.  They will come up with new ideas of
fidgetmaking utilities and addons that they'd like to see in a
fidgetmaking program, and what they plan on contributing to the
source code when it is finally released.  Some people will
advocate this program heavily just due to the fact that it is
totally the opposite of what other commercial companies are doing
with their fidgetmaking programs.

All of this advocacy and "spreading the word" about OpenFidget is
going to make me happy now because I've got a tonne of people on
the internet supporting and using my fidgetmaking program for
free.  I've now basically got free advertising.

The fidgetmaking mailing lists are going crazy with people
spending countless hours discussing the good and bad points of my
program, as well as their thoughts of some new features they'd
like to see.  I'm watching all of this and taking notes...  I've
got free beta guinea pigs now, and a sense at where my market
lies for FidgetMaker.

Now OpenFidget is stablizing and the pending final release is
nearing.  I announce that the "release of source code" for
OpenFidget has been decided against for business reasons.

All of the people that are on the OpenFidget mailing list are now
very upset at me and my company now due to all of the time
they've spent discussing my program and how to improve it, and
also providing tech support for my product for free.  They feel
that they've been betrayed and let down.  They've been used as a
marketing tool as well.

Are they justified in their feelings of being betrayed and lied
to?  Well?

They deserve, at the least - an apology from me and my company
which explains why they were betrayed.

This analogy is almost directly what happened here IMHO.

 
> >At the least, I expect a sincere apology from Caldera - not just to me,
> but to everyone on all >the mailing lists that have actively participated
> in advocating and discussing OpenDOS.
> 
> I would think you would show a little bit of gratitude yourself, if for
> nothing else than for the sources they DID release.  I, at least, have
> learned not to be ungrateful.

I have showed gratitude to Caldera by advocating OpenDOS and
hence indirectly generating revenue for them.  I have been VERY
MUCH an advocate of OD since day 1.  ANYONE on this mailing list
will vouch for that.  Ask Gene, Tim, or peruse the mailing list
archives for yourself.  You'll see PLENTY of one liner "thankyou"
notes in my .signature file.  I *HAD* at least 8 different
"Caldera OpenDOS advocacy" signature files in my sigfile rotator
script.  I advertized their website, their product, their
company, and how wonderful and superior their product and
ideology was.

Now isn't all of what I just said true?  Read the mailing list
archives.  I've paid my dues to Caldera for the "free" binary of
OpenDOS and kernel source a hundred times over.

*THAT* is MORE than enough gratitude from me towards them IMHO.

If you disagree that I've expended enough gratitude to them now,
please feel free to point out what I should have done to show
more gratitude?  Should I fly to England and kiss Noorda's feet
and put Caldera posters up in every room of my house?

Please explain where I failed to be gratuitous.


Mike A. Harris        |  Homepage:  http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant   |  Am I online? -  finger or ping capslock.dyn.ml.org
My dynamic address: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris/ip-address.html
Mark should get a sound card and more ISA slots!!!!!!!!  ;o)

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019