Unlimited software warranties (was Re: Mach from mt Xinu)

[John G. DeArmond]

rcd at ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:

>You want an infinite warranty?  A more useful statement would be "since
>software doesn't `wear', the analogy to a warranty on a physical commodity
>does not make sense."

>> Sell Mach (for the $1000 or $1500 or whatever) with an ``Unlimited
>> Money back Guarantee''...

>Why not just suggest that they declare Chapter 7?  Comes down to the same
>thing.

Is that an indication that you think most of the software would come back?

>Now, you *could* suggest that they sell the software with unlimited-term
>bug fixes...that's half of what you're asking...but the price is *not*
>going to be $1000-1500, or anything close to it.

>Sure...and the customer can pull the plug and TAKE a refund.  He can use it
>until it's obsolete, find a bug (or whatever) and demand a refund.  He gets
>the use of it for as long as he wants; the price of the software is merely
>a deposit.


I don't really understand why a money-back, satisfaction guaranteed
is so alien to compunter companies.  It must root from days when Bill Gates
used to run ads calling people all kinds of names for copying his paper
tape BASIC.  There has developed a righteous indignation on the part of
software vendors that says that customers should feel honored to pay
what many feel to be extortion prices for software only find it bug-riddled
and sometimes unusable?

The satisfaction guaranteed warranty is so obvious, I'm not sure why 
more vendors have not picked up on it.  After all, it works for WallMart 
(wonder if Sam Walton being the richest man in America could be a 
lucky coincidence?), K-mart, Sears, and most reputable mail order operations.
All these guys run on vastly smaller margins than software companies.

I can't understand why computer companies would want unsatisfied customers 
in the first place.  If you give 'em their money back, the most they
can honestly say is that the product did not fit their needs.  And the 
warm jucies that _cheerfully_ refunded money gives people little 
motivation to be vindictive.  ISC's _OLD_ (want make the distinction now)
and SCO's current policy are sorta at the opposite end of the customer
satisfaction spectrum.  Customers who buy because it's the only thing
available are NOT loyal customers.

Coming from a non-computer background, my perspective is slightly
different. Customer satisfaction is a natural given and if it takes
giving the money back, even if the customer is abusing the process,
that's what we did.  I used to own a wholesale welding supply company. 
Even though we sold hardware that DOES wear out to people who are not
know for their sophistication, we had an unlimited money-back guarantee. 
If you had the guts to actually lug in a worn out welder and ask, we'd
give you your money back. Even given that the welding supply business is
a hostile warranty environment, our warranty adjustments  ran well under
0.5%.  I can count on one hand the number of instances where I knew the
person was ripping me off.  And in a couple of cases, I later did 
profitable business with the individuals.  We were successful even given
that our average gross margins were under 20%. 

I think that the proper question is not whether a satisfaction-guaranteed 
warranty is reasonable but why it's taken so long to come about.

john

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC        | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade"  (tm)
Rapid Deployment System, Inc. |  Home of the Nidgets (tm)
Marietta, Ga                  | 
{emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd      |"Politically InCorrect.. And damn proud of it