On May 7, 6:46=A0am, jimsym <jim.z...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Let's put this in perspective. =A0Even with the policy change,
> SolidWorks Corp is still better than competitors.
>
> PTC - you must backpay maintenance to the expiration date AND pay a
> 25% penalty.
>
> Autodesk - One release behind, pay a $995 Upgrade Fee AND Subscription
> Service
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Two releases behind, pay a $1495
Upgrad=
e Fee AND
> Subscription Service
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Three releases behind, buy a new
licens=
e.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0NOTE: =A0Subscription Service does
NOT =
include tech
> sup****t
>
> Don't get me wrong, I prefer the $500 reinstallation fee, but the
> weeds are still worse on the other side of the fence.
Jim, glad you noted the differences. I don't review other CAD
packages.
I am NOT against charging a fee to reinstitute maintenance services
including customer sup****t. That is, well, normal business that is
known upfront going in on a "deal". There is one part of the deal
that is NOT revealed when you buy, though, and not a part of any
"guarantee" or "warranty of fittness"; specifically that the software
will be stable and not have any broken features (if they are broken,
leave them out).
What I would like is a fully functional SP 0 on January 1. I simply
hate paying on January 1, then not loading the application until
August or September when it gets to SP 5.
If a company can't get the software right until August-September, then
it ought to be released as SP0 for the following year.
Bo
|
