Trailblazer Setup for HDB <--[NO! NO! NO!] for the UNIX PC

[Robert J. Granvin]

>    >>>We don't need support, except for maybe a correct manual   ( 1/2 |-) )
>    >>>Please oh please please please release HDB to us, AT&T.
>    
>    I understand where ATT is coming from.  _Nothing_ on this planet is
>    unsupported.
>
>ALL software on this planet is unsupported. UNIX for starters...

Gee, I've got pretty good support on my copies of Unix, and all the
other software I have.  This to me does not meet the criteria of
"unsupported".  I've even gotten support on public domain software.
:-)

>    Right now, everyone and their mother would be excited for HDB to be
>    released totally unsupported.  "Yes, I know it's unsupported.  I'll take
>    my chances, and never ever ever call ATT about it" is an easy thing to
>    think right now.  And today it would be acceptable.
>
>This is the case with ALL software we currently see.

All released products from ATT, whether it be software or hardware is
supported to at least a partial degree.  You get your full implied
warranty, plus you are also able to purchase a maintenance and support
contract _if you wish_.  While you may never see an update to these
products, they are not unsupported.

>    It can be argued that when ATT ships the product, they include a written
>    disclaimer with the distribution, but in reality, what's the chances of
>    every user receiving that disclaimer?
>
>They already do, with every single bit of software they sell. I would like
>to remind you that UNIX itself is disclaimed against any and every
>suitability for purpose, reliability, etc... Also, when you buy a support
>contract for software, look carefully a the words on the contract you sign.

See below.

>It is ALMOST ALWAYS the case that it says that you pay money to REPORT bugs,
>period. Many suppliers will not LISTEN to bug reports unless you pay for
>them to, and that is all they are prepared to undertake to do for you. In
>some cases a support contract may also include occasional distributions of
>software updates, about which no representation is made either.

I'd suggest you start looking at other vendors.  I've reported many
problems and bugs to several vendors and manufacturers for supported
and unsupported products alike.  I've found a global willingness to
listen to the problems you have discovered, and in many cases received
a fix or upgrade even though I don't have a current maintenance
contract.  Where I may have had to pay was when requesting
informational support on a product that had no conrtact.  That is a
reasonable thing to expect.

>Please, please. Everybody should always remember that they agreed that any
>use of almost any computer software is done at their own risk and that they
>agreed that they should bear all damages and costs. Many licenses even say
>that the customer shall pay for the costs incurred by the supplier in
>defending themselves against claims of having stolen the software from a
>third party... AT&T licenses thank goodness don't, by the way.

Wait a moment... Please be aware of one thing...

While the licenses state clearly (Assuming you have them when you
copied the software [:-)] or at least read them) that you bear full
risk for the use or misuse of the product, the provider does not bear
any responsibility for its fitness to your needs and applications.

HOWEVER, there is an implied and _legal_ obligation on the part of the
manufacturer to provide a product that MEETS its stated functions.  If
you buy a product that claims to do Task-A, Task-B and Task-C, but
Task-B fails or is not available, you have full legal recourse to
recover your investment (purchase price) or cause lots of hassle for
the manufacturer.  In this case, it's a breach of contract, and you
have the legal recourses available for that (within the realms that
befit software, of course).  If Task-B fails because it doesn't meet
your needs, but is still functional, then you lose that recourse.

ATT HDB is stated to perform certain functions.  The 3b1 HDB does NOT
meet those functions.  If ATT were to release it, they would have to
make it viciously clear what this version does and does NOT do; and
you still leave yourself open for problems since all of your other
version DO meet those specs.

I know that I myself would be very very reluctant to release a product
under those conditions.  Especially when the product has problems.
And not totally insignificant ones either.

ATT HDB for the 3b1... Is it a better product than the stock UUCP that
came with the machine?  More than likely.  Is it less buggy or more
stable.  I'd sincerely doubt it.  Does it solve some problems you'll
get with stock UUCP?  Sure, but it'll create new ones...

As stated above, I support the release of HDB in any form.  The
version(s) that are floating around are notably stable, albeit with
problems.  These points are merely to explain that the thoughts that
releasing the product for a "dead, unsupported" machine would cause no
problems for ATT or it's users just isn't a reality.  It will, but I
still think it's worth it as long as everyone accepting the use of the
product realizes that even installing it may affect things
unexpectedly.  Use of it is yet another situation.

Unfortunately, as has been previously noted, there isn't even a 3b1
product manager anymore.  The Store! hasn't been updated in (excess?)
of two years.  The only independent support currently in operation is
the system support of the kernel and other related functions.  Getting
ATT to release yet another (Existing, even) product to the masses
would first entail finding someone has has the authority to do so.
Heck if I know who that is anymore... :-)

-- 
       Robert J. Granvin           
   National Computer Systems     "Looks like the poor devil died in his sleep."
       rjg at sialis.mn.org         "What a terrible way to die."
{amdahl,hpda}!bungia!sialis!rjg