From an ongoing dialogue with one of our suppliers:
> From: [Name deleted to protect the, uh, whatever.] > > Simon, > > My name is [Name deleted] and I am an account manager at Inetsoft. My > records show that > your maintenance expired on May 1, 2004. To get support at > this point, you > would renew maintenance as usual, but also would need to pay > a $100 penalty > for the breach in maintenance (This should have been indicated on the > original quote). As you were operating on the complementary 60-day > maintenance, a 1-year extended maintenance would be traced > back to the date > of purchase (Mar 2, 2004), giving a renewal date of Mar 1, 2005.
So, as I read this, in order to get serious defects in your product repaired, you want to charge me a year's fee for six month's support, plus a hundred dollar fine on top?
This doesn't sound too reasonable to me...
Cheers, Simon Brunning.
Update: They got back to me:
Please understand without these terms, many customers would decline initial maintenance, and come back to the sales department and purchase maintenance only when they run into a problem. This causes problems for our customers, as they need to produce the funds and process the order all the while development is on hold because of a bug or issue in the software that does not allow them to continue their efforts. Comparatively speaking, the penalty is a small amount and is primarily in place to discourage this activity.
Ah, so these terms are for our benefit! It all makes sense now!
iText it is, then.Posted to Java by Simon Brunning at September 10, 2004 08:48 AM