DEC software distribution policy

[James D Moore]

In article <2173 at shodha.enet.dec.com> alan at shodha.enet.dec.com ( Alan's Home for Wayward Notes File.) writes:
>
>	This reply is mostly a commentary on how things ought to work 
>	and some suggestions on how to get there from here.  It is NOT 
>	an official statement by Digital Equipment Corp. (henceforth
>	called DEC).  DEC does not read News though many of the people
>	that work there do.
>

OK ! I appreciate the straight forward statement of this.

>In article <1990Dec19.135709.3689 at noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, jmoore at cidmac.ecn.purdue.edu (James D Moore) writes:
>	I took a look at the V4.0 Software Product Description
>	and for the DECsystem 3100 and DECstation 3100S, the
>	TLZ04 is listed as supported.  It appears that UWS V4.0
>	has a seperate SPD.  You should be able to find one in
>	the documentation that came with the media.  If the SPD
>	says that the TLZ04 is supported then you shouldn't need
>	V4.1.
>

I did this and it appears that it does indeed show it as supported in the 
UWS 4.0 also. I was not able to find the V4.0 Software Product Descriptipon
but will take your word on it. This is the type of information I was looking
for. 

>	You also probably want to look a piece of paper that says
>	"Software Warranty Addendum".  This may be very important
>	later.

I am looking for this one for my records also.... I have too much
documentation I have not looked at yet but I will keep looking.

>

(portion of article deleted)

>
>> 
>> Some recent comments have given me the suspicion that DEC sends software 
>> updates only to people with the appropriate software support (purchased 
>> from them of course).
>
>	Updates are part of the service we sell.
>
>> Should I be screaming at DEC about getting Ultrix 4.1?
>
>	You should never scream.  It tends to make people react
>	in a negitive way.  Always hold back screaming as a last
>	resort.
>

I apollogize here if my article seemed to be a flame to DEC. This is not my
normal mode of operation. I did not intend to scream at anyone. Please 
substitute "complain to" for "scream at". After all I agree with what you
said. I stand corrected....

>	As far as the TLZ04 goes, check the SPD you have to see
>	if it is listed as supported.  If it is, then you might
>	want to have your DEC sales person double check for you.
>	I was under the impression that it wasn't supported until
>	V4.1.  SPD have been slightly wrong in the past.  It may
>	that you merely have to apply a paper patch to the system
>	to fix whatever it is that causes the TLZ04 to not be
>	supported.
>

I am currently checking into this (I am on the phone with DEC as I type this).
Someone is checking for me about it and I am on hold.

>	If V4.1 is indeed required, then you should go back to
>	your DEC salesperson and explain the problem.  There is
>	a fair chance they will see the problem and "Do the Right
>	Thing" on your behalf.  On the chance they don't for what-
>	ever reason you can start walking up the management chain
>	to get the problem solved.
>

I have contacted my Sales Rep about this but he has not contacted me back yet.
Understandable since it is pretty close to the hollidays. He ususaly is prompt
to contact me in a reasonably short time.


>> After all when we ordered the entire system we also placed the order for 
>> the TLZ04 at the same time.  One of the reasons for us ordering when we 
>> did was that we were told that X11R4 would be shipped with Ultrix 4.0.
>> Now we find that 4.0 does not have R4 supported and that 4.1 does. 
>> Any comments on how I should approach DEC about this? 
>
>	Rationally and politely.  You see, LEGALLY we may not owe
>	you anything.  And there are people that will look at that
>	and say "Sorry".  Other people will look at it and say, "I'll
>	do what I can".
>

That is the approach I have taken.

>> 
>> I beleive that DEC should supply the most recent software when a complete
>> system is ordered especially if one of the major components is going to 
>> require a software revision like the TLZ04 (which by the way has a patch 
>> tape included for Ultrix 4.1). 
>
>	"Most recent software" is a strange concept.  For example today
>	V4.1 is the current version of the software in the U.S.  It SHOULD
>	be what our software distribution center sends to customers when
>	they order something.  All to often someone will get the recently
>	previous version because that was what was on the shelf.  Europe 
>	though V4.0 is current.  
(some portion of the article deleted)

The point I was trying to make here (which I did so uneloquently) is that 
I believe it to be good policy to provide updates to customers who recieve 
a software distribution just before a new release. Lets say for example 
anyone who can show they purchased the distribution within 3 months of the
new release. I realize that it is not always possible but it has been done.

>
>> Comments? Suggestions? 
>
>	The TLZ04 is simple.  Either it is supported by V4.0 or it
>	isn't.  If it isn't then you need to work it out with your
>	DEC salesperson.

As it happens I just got off of the phone with DEC support. While the TLZ04 
is a supported system under Ultrix 4.0 it does have a bug that will not allow
you to restore on multi media dumps. The dumps are OK but you cannot restore
them beyond the first tape. This is what the patch for 4.1 is supposed to fix. 
There is no patch for Ultrix 4.0 available so DEC is going to be doing the 
right thing and get me a copy of the 4.1 update tape. One user I was told
had tried to patch his 4.0 system with the 4.1 one tape and it resulted in his
system crashing.

>
>	If there is some other feature of V4.0 that isn't there that
>	you were expecting (X11R4 for example) then you'll need to
>	also work that out with the salesperson.
>

I have already done this. Thanks for the advice.

>> Are you listening DEC ???
>
>	Officially no.  This newsgroup is NOT an official support
>	channel.  If you want somebody to listen offically then you
>	need to find somebody whose job is to listen officially.  I
>	don't know anybody whose job is read USENET news.

I will disregard the above comments since they probably are an interpretation 
of my un-eloquence. Again my comments were never intended as a flame or a
comment of DEC support in a derogatory way.

>-- 
>Alan Rollow				alan at nabeth.enet.dec.com

Thanks Alan for your reply ... unofficial that is....

Jim Moore

--
James D. Moore				jmoore at ecn.purdue.edu
Computer Engineer 			Phone:(317) 494-2686
Purdue University, Industrial Engr. Dept., W. Lafayette, In 47907