Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!apollo!oj
From: oj@apollo.COM (Ellis Oliver Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: Hey Apollo folks...Listen up
Message-ID: <40153f00.d5b2@apollo.COM>
Date: 6 Dec 88 00:54:00 GMT
References: <8811160706.AA01866@umix.cc.umich.edu> <40147143.d5b2@apollo.COM>
Reply-To: oj@canyon.UUCP (Ellis Oliver Jones)
Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 102

In article <40147143.d5b2@apollo.COM> oj@apollo.com (Ollie Jones) writes:
>In article <8811160706.AA01866@umix.cc.umich.edu> FERGUSON@BKNLVMS.BITNET writes:
>>       Did the graphics developers have any say in this decision
>>       to charge extra for GPR?
>
>Once again with feeling!  HERE'S THE SCOOP ON UNBUNDLING! 
>
>GPR is bundled.  The whole kit and kaboodle, including
>/lib/gprlib and all the header files, is bundled with the system
>software.  I just rechecked the software release areas for
>SR9.7.1, SR10, SR10.p (DN10000), and SR10.1, and I know this to be true.
>GPR will also be included with SR10.1.p.  If it isn't I won't sign 
>off on it.
>
>I cannot imagine a Domain/OS system in which GPR was not present.  I don't
>think it would work at all.   Everything I can think of in the way of
>graphics and text software depends on GPR, including the DM, X, DSPST, the debuggers,
>CRP (create_remote_process), the VT100 emulator, the dumb terminal emulator,
>the 4014 emulator, GNU Emacs, etc, etc, etc.
>
>GPR IS BUNDLED.  WE HAVE NO PLANS TO UNBUNDLE ANY PART OF GPR.  PERIOD.
>--- -- -------   -- ---- -- ----- -- -------- --- ---- -- ---   ------
>
>>       Charging extra for GMR 2D, and 3D have been bad enough ...
>
>We've charged extra for 3dGMR almost since its beginning.  
>It's a lot of code, it's costly to develop and support, 
>the two large manuals are expensive to print 
>and ship, and not everybody wants it.  
>
>At SR10, 2dGMR did get unbundled.   However, every node still has a license to
>use 2dGMR at runtime.  That's still bundled.   If you want to use 2d GMR with SR10, 
>you have to get the bits and the manual somewhere.  If you get the bits 
>and the manual from Apollo, we charge you $180 at most (sorry, I don't
>know prices or order numbers) for a media kit.   You don't have to buy one 
>kit per node, you just have to get the bits and the manual somewhere.  
>By hook or by crook!  Multiple node sites usually buy just one runtime
>kit, at most.
>
>Lately we are charging substantially more for the 2d GMR DEVELOPMENT kit to
>new customers.  Anyone who was a 2dGMR user before Feb 1st, 1988
>is "grandfathered," however.  These customers (including Scott Ferguson at Bucknell
>and David Krowitz at MIT) can, if they wish, order the developer's media 
>and documentation kit (again $180 at most).   I'm sure there are less formal 
>and equally good ways of getting the bits and books as well.
>
>If you have 2dgmr-dependent software which you wish to give to someone
>else, give them the gmrlib too if you like.   They're not violating 
>their license agreement by running 2d gmr on their nodes, even if they 
>don't get the bits straight from Apollo.
>
>Please do take care to make sure you run the right version!  Otherwise
>you're not taking advantage of a lot of Apollo's hard work in configuration 
>testing, and you may get bizarre errors.  Many customers will buy a runtime 
>kit so they can be sure about this, although you don't have to if you
>know someplace else you can get it.
>
>>       I'll bet you're about to pull one of those IBM/Microsoft moves
>>       and make the current GPR calls incompatible with the next
>>       version like you did with GMR2D, so that we'll absolutely
>>       have to buy it.
>
>Baloney.  Speculation.  FALSE.   We put a lot of effort into GPR compatibility, 
>and it would be over the dead bodies of many engineers here that we'd pull 
>such a stunt.  Plus, many key OEMs and software vendors would drop us like 
>a dirty syringe if we were so stupid.   Plus, we're not unbundling GPR.
>
>This is not to say that we couldn't clean up the GPR interface a lot
>if we could make incompatible changes.  From the point of view of the 
>cleanliness and ease-of-use of the GPR interface, it's too bad we can't 
>change GPR.
>
>>            I think I'm going to stop telling our potential Sun customers
>>      to consider Apollo before buying. Why should I do you people any more
>>      favors?
>
>Please don't do that!  We do need your support!
>
>>          A note to you Apollo R&D folks responsible for the development
>>      of GPR, GMR2D and GMR3D: I would like to hear from you on this net
>>      to explain whose brilliant idea this is, and whether you agree or
>>      not.
>
>Hey, I'm not going to break ranks (any more than I've already done
>in this message  :-).  Seriously, I do agree with the current policy as it
>stands.  I don't agree with charging extra for GPR or 2d GMR runtime.  
>Fortunately, that's not the current policy.
>
>It is, however, a great shame that we didn't get the word out sooner 
>and more clearly about the 2d GMR change.  Just finding it gone, without
>explanation, certainly eroded your confidence, and for a really dumb
>and avoidable reason.  No one person's to blame. Now we have to work to 
>regain the trust we lost.
>
>You all can help!  Quit with the false rumors about unbundling GPR, willya
>plluueeezze?
>
>If we at Apollo can give any further clarification on these issues,
>please ask.  Thanks again for your business, and thanks for taking 
>the time to help straighten this out.
>
>/Ollie Jones  Graphics Software Engineer, Apollo Computer, Inc.