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.