SCO support for Xenix (or lack of).

[Ken Abrams]

I intend to send this message as mail and also post it to the xenix news
group in hopes that it will spark some additional discussion.
 
First I think it is imperative that we precisely define "support" 
for the context of this discussion so we can know exactly what SCO
has in mind.  If we are talking about upgrades and enhancements as
support, then I have absolutely no problem with a decision by SCO
to drop this kind of support.  If, on the other hand, we are talking
about bug fixes and "customer" support (ie user has a place to call
with questions) then I do NOT think it is proper for SCO to stop this
kind of support on such a short time frame as is proposed (1991).
 
I think this might fall in the category of a consumer rights issue.
In the last 10 years or so, regulations have been enacted that requires
a company to provide service and parts for major consumer purchases for
some minimum period (assuming the company doesn't go out of business).
This applies to cars and major appliances and the like.  How would you
feel if you paid $15,000 for a car and found out when the car is 2 years
old that the manufacturer decided to stop making spare parts for it 
because the profit margin wasn't high enough?  I think we can draw some
parallels in this discussion although I doubt that any of these statutes
have been successfully applied to computer software but maybe it should.
(I am NOT a lawyer).  I have had one personal experience along these 
lines.  One year after I bought my first PC, the company dropped support
of it COMPLETELY so they could concentrate on newer models (more $$$).
I can guarantee you that I will NEVER do business with these folks 
again either on a personal basis or through my employer.
 
Next lets talk briefly about costs to "upgrade" to UNIX.  The initial 
cost of the operating system software is only the tip of the iceberg.
In order to get a true picture of the total costs involved in this 
kind of a change, one must add in the time involved to do the load,
the time and money required to adapt all the other software, the cost
of re-training all the administrators and users and the cost of lost
production time while all this takes place.  In a fairly large operation,
I can envision these costs amounting to 10X the cost of the opsys 
itself.  Now we are talking about costs in the range of $ 15,000 instead
of the original $ 1,500 we are asked to shell out for UNIX.  In addition
to all these costs, there is the general hassle of changing out a stable
environment for something that is unknown.  I'm sure that there will be
cases where the conversion will be VERY long and expensive and messy.
Given this possibility, I think the consumer should be allowed to make
this decision freely without any subversive pressure from SCO to make
a change that he really doesn't need (in a lot of cases).
 
Another user suggested that if you're unhappy  "Just say NO to SCO UNIX"
and I agree totally (if they drop support entirely for any of the 
XENIX products).  Unfortunately, this still leaves us with a nasty
choice to make; stick with an unsupported product or go through the
hassle of buying someone else's UNIX.  I don't like either choice.
I have been paying my annual Softcare fee even though I have called
SCO only twice since my initial "warranty" period expired.  If they
continue to offer this service I will keep up my "subscription".
If, on the other hand, they do discontinue support for my Xenix 386,
I don't really know what I will do but I AM sure that SCO will NOT
be included in the solution.
 
That's my 2 cents worth.  I do think that someone at SCO owes us a
better definition of what they mean when they say that they 
"might drop support for Xenix 386 sometime after 1991" (may not be an
exact quote).
 
 

-- 
========================================================
Ken Abrams                     uunet!pallas!kabra437
Illinois Bell                  kabra437 at athenanet.com
Springfield                    (voice) 217-753-7965