NetExpress 3.1 Runtime Fees
Bob7536
I have placed a call to Merant this morning to find out what is going on with
the runtime fees. I talked with MaryEllen Reeves who is listed as the
MicroFocus sales contact she is going to have a regional sales representative
call me. They are located in the CA office so it will be in a couple hours. I
will post the response to this newgroup. If anyone would like an e-mail on
this let me know.
Thanks,
Bob Hennessey
Bob7536
I received a call from Joe Beede who is a regional sales rep. for NetExpress.
According to Joe the runtime fees of NetExpress are going to be similar to the
UNIX fees. A ten pack of licenses will cost $847.00 US dollars. They will
however let you break up the ten pack between customers so that in effect there
will be a $84.70 US dollars license fee per user. I explained to Joe that the
retail price of my product was under $1,000.00 US dollars and that I could not
afford to pay Merant 10% of the retail price of my product. He is going to
talk with his boss and also send me the name of the person who is in charge of
the NetExpress product.
Thanks,
Bob Hennessey
Kenneth P. Mullins
charge an extra $84.70 dollars...I don't think
so...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What a crock of donkey crap this is...
kenmullins
"Robert Kovacic" <r...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:25iZ4.9890$c5.1...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> The local Merant office advised me that the ten pack licenses were the
> minimum cost PER SITE and could NOT be broken up between customers.
>
> Given their inconsistency and pricing policy we would be foolish to base
any
> more business plans on programs compiled with their NetExpress product.
Once
> burnt ...
>
> Regards, Robert Kovacic.
>
> Bob7536 <bob...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20000531160517...@ng-cq1.aol.com...
Robert Kovacic
Mayer Goldberg
On 1-Jun-2000, "Kenneth P. Mullins" <kenmu...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> I develop some shareware products that sell for $50.00...Now I am suppose
> to
> charge an extra $84.70 dollars...I don't think
> so...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Are these people (MF) desperately trying to get out of business? Hey,
Fujitsu: Why don't you come out with a mainframe version and put them out of
their miseries! :))
Mayer
Thane Hubbell
Fujitsu has no runtime fees for the normal distribution. The do have
runtime fees for multi-threaded distribution ($40.00) and large
runtime fees for PowerBsort ($225).
Fujitsu is geared toward PC development. I can see runtime fees for
Mainframe Express -- where you offload development, but not
deployment. Personally I HATE runtime fees.
For PC targeted development I recommend Fujitsu
For Mainframe offloading, I recommend Ca-Realia Worbench
donald tees
>
>Fujitsu has no runtime fees for the normal distribution. The do have
>runtime fees for multi-threaded distribution ($40.00) and large
>runtime fees for PowerBsort ($225).
>
>Fujitsu is geared toward PC development. I can see runtime fees for
>Mainframe Express -- where you offload development, but not
>deployment. Personally I HATE runtime fees.
>
>For PC targeted development I recommend Fujitsu
>
>For Mainframe offloading, I recommend Ca-Realia Worbench
>
Speaking of multi-threading (on a PC), does anybody know how to package and
execute EXE files into/from a DLL? I'd like to get rid of a whole lot of
Cobol EXE's in my distribution to tidy things up. I want to execute them,
though. I do not want to call them. Placing them into the DLL is trivial,
as is calling them.
B W Spoor
Flexus sp2 to replace my very old MS-Cobol v4.5 DOS compiler. MS-Cobol
had no runtime licences, neither does Fujitsu and their annual
maintenance fees are also very reasonable.
As MS-Cobol was MF Cobol rebadged my 'natural' progression would be to
NetExpress. I looked at it, but didn't like the price, runtime
licencing, annual maintenance or the sales peoples (in UK) attitude.
I also looked at RM/Cobol and AcuCobol, both good products but also with
runtime licences. Both of these came out above NetExpress in my
evaluation because you could buy the parts of the system needed rather
than having to have the lot (unless Merant have changed this since I
last looked).
With an evaluation copy of Fujitsu v5 I have ported part of a system
(with help from this newsgroup and Fujitsu support) so I am happy that
the compiler will do the job with not too much rewriting.
Brian
Rich Rohde
Leslie Carstons (Merant sales rep). We discussed this issue for
45 minutes and I think someone at Merant is starving for money.
I have about 120 clients using my software (not many compared to
others). Based on the $84/$85 per licence fee (and I don't know
if this is per year/monthly/weekly/daily or will you have to buy
another license for each NetExpress upgrade), it will cost my
clients $10,200. I provide working demos of MY software, do I
have to purchase a license for each demo using NetExpress 3.1?
(Leslie didn't think so, since the software is a demo, there
would be a charge). If demos are no charge, then what if I give
my software away, would I have to get a license?
What if I write a web application with NetExpress, do I have to
charge each person that accesses the web application a license
fee? (I know, this is absurd, but what if?). This may be the
solution to the problem, make MY software a web based
application that works on a server computer in my office and
just sell access to the web application to new clients.
What about the 'bugs' that are outstanding with NetExpress 3.0?
If I don't upgrade to NE 3.1, is Merant obligated to fix the
reported problems with NE 3.0?
I am really #$% !$#%& *(%^ (pardon me). I feel I have been taken
advantage of by Merant. Not only are they doing this, but they
don't even support a users conference any more.
Bah Humbug.
Rich
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Kenneth P. Mullins
use NetExpress and how difficult it is to convert products/applications to
another product...I would have abandoned them a long time ago, if I had not
had so many lines of code in existing applications and products...
BUT keep in mind new products can be produced with other cobol
compilers...Maybe even look into VB as an option...I'm installing it today
myself...Power Builder? Access?
At a minimum, it's time to shell out for another vendor's cobol compiler...
I'd call my sales rep, IF I NEW WHO HE/SHE WAS???
kenmullins
atlanta, ga
"Rich Rohde" <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:16678860...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
Costas Giannoulis
It seems that one of the greatest Cobol suppliers decided to abandon Cobol
!!! Nice !!! And then we are talking about other (pure) languages and the
strength of Cobol and the new standard and OO and ... bla bla bla... while
on the other hand Sun gives for free JDK, JRE, Forte 4 Java , documentation,
on-line support ...bla bla bla
HOW THE HELL these people expect to attract new programmers and software
houses near to Cobol ????? Maybe on the next few days we will hear that
MERANT has built a powerful IDE for Java (IoI)
I am (and i'm not the only one) very disappointed because after many years,
just for a moment, i thought that Cobol had a chance ....
I believe, now merant has done the begining, we should expect the same
behavior from other vendors ...
To Thane : Ok. I will move on to Fujitsu. And what about my OO code ? Is
there any compatibility between the class libraries ? I don't think so ...
And you believe that Fujitsu will not charge the same after 2 years ? I
don't think so ...
So, people, let's go comp.lang.java
Wish luck to all of u
Costas
Thane Hubbell
<dia...@otenet.gr> wrote:
>My sympathy to all,
>
>To Thane : Ok. I will move on to Fujitsu. And what about my OO code ? Is
>there any compatibility between the class libraries ? I don't think so ...
>And you believe that Fujitsu will not charge the same after 2 years ? I
>don't think so ...
>
If you use the "Standard" defined OO - the code is compatible. If you
used Merants specific extensions it's not.
>So, people, let's go comp.lang.java
>
>
Java/2 requireds licensing.
Before we get all upset and abandon COBOL because of one vendors
idiocy - there are alternatives.
The"Closest" to MicroFocus COBOL is Fujitsu.
For Mainframe offloading - use Realia Workbench II.
Or you can try AcuCOBOL, Liant RM/COBOL (Both with Runtime Fees) or
Realis COBOL with no PC runtime fees on distribution.
I think Fujitsu will behave better in relation to runtime fees - but
they have already krept in with the runtime for the multi-threaded
applications. However, the fees are REASONABLE (Max $40.00 with lower
numbers as volume increases).
Thane Hubbell
<richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote:
>solution to the problem, make MY software a web based
>application that works on a server computer in my office and
>just sell access to the web application to new clients.
>
If you write a web based application you are required to buy the
Server based Runtime product - licensed Per Server - at $10,000 - with
nearly $3000 per year maintenance.
donald tees
multinationals. An independent cannot make money if the software they write
carries that kind of overhead.
Thane Hubbell wrote in message <3937d66d....@news.cox-internet.com>...
William M. Klein
have run-time fees - but I could be wrong on that.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix dot netcom dot com
"Thane Hubbell" <tha...@softwaresimple.com> wrote in message
news:3937d71c....@news.cox-internet.com...
Bob7536
I would ask that everyone in this news group who uses MicroFocus NetExpress to
please contact the following people:
Gary Greenfield
President of Merant
Panos Anastassiadis
V.P. World Wide Distribution
Tony Hill
VP and General Manger of ACT (MicroFocus)
You may call them at 1-800-582-1600 or e-mail them at
firstname...@merant.com
Please be respect in all communications with them and lets try and get them to
change this decision.
Thanks,
Bob Hennessey
Costas Giannoulis
I believe that if these people you mention care about Cobol and their
customers then they must have seen this thread. So what more can we say to
them ?
Well, ok. I 'll try to contact Panos who is Greek (like me :) and we shall
see.
Regards
Costas
Thane Hubbell
<wmk...@nospam.ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>No one has mentioned PerCOBOL in this discussion. As I recall, they do NOT
>have run-time fees - but I could be wrong on that.
>
I meant to mention them. For those considering JAVA as an
alternative, I would STRONGLY recommend having a look at PerCOBOL.
They have been quietly (http://www.legacyj.com) enhancing their
product. The ported some of my example code (with my permission) to
their compiler and it looks great.
---
Try a better search engine: http://www.google.com
My personal web site: http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/2006/
Thane Hubbell
<dia...@otenet.gr> wrote:
>Hi Bob,
>
>I believe that if these people you mention care about Cobol and their
>customers then they must have seen this thread. So what more can we say to
>them ?
>Well, ok. I 'll try to contact Panos who is Greek (like me :) and we shall
>see.
Contrary to popular belief the COBOL vendors do not monitor this group
(With a few notable exceptions - Tom --BTW - Lower your single
developer runtime to $10.00 per copy and I bet you can get a LOAD of
converts).
William M. Klein
I *strongly* doubt that "senior" management sees threads like this (even if
you forward copies to your local contacts).
--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix dot netcom dot com
"Costas Giannoulis" <dia...@otenet.gr> wrote in message
news:8h8slr$8so$1...@newssrv.otenet.gr...
> Hi Bob,
>
> I believe that if these people you mention care about Cobol and their
> customers then they must have seen this thread. So what more can we say to
> them ?
> Well, ok. I 'll try to contact Panos who is Greek (like me :) and we shall
> see.
>
donald tees
>Good Afternoon,
>
>I would ask that everyone in this news group who uses MicroFocus NetExpress
to
>please contact the following people:
>
I do not use MF, but use to. I switched to Fujitsu because of Merant's
outrageous prices. I have mailed off a note saying just that.
Bob7536
I received an e-mail back from Panos Anestassiadis who is the VP in charge of
World Wide Distribution. He has sent my request to Hugh McCarney who is the
head of sales for Merant. So they are reading the messages that we are
sending. I urge everbody to please let your feeling be known in a respectful
manner. Hopefully we can turn this situation arround for the benefit of
everbody.
Thanks,
Bob Hennessey
Raymond Leech
I've responded to a couple of your comments.
> another license for each NetExpress upgrade), it will cost my
> clients $10,200.
_company_ $128,000 to upgrade anytime before 2005 (assuming 10-packs
cannot be split).
The web license is even more laughable. $10,000 is 2.5 times what I
spend on each web server including hardware, OS and software. Its more
than 2 times what it cost to write the app. Thank heavens its also an
easy part to port to another vendor!!
Its hard enough to convince some people that COBOL is still a viable
platform, harder to convince them that its economical even when it costs
7 times more than VB and nearly impossible to justify an 11%-20%
per/seat royalty is justified. Hopefully someone inside Merant still has
their senses and drops this.
> I think someone at Merant is starving for money.
From this Apr 14 article, maybe this was the only way they could build
profits. Maybe the royalties make up the other 1/3. I found this on
quote.yahoo.com
"Merant said its fourth-quarter results will suffer at the hands of non-
recurring charges of between 6 million and 9 million pounds ($9.51
million to $14.26 million) as a result of its planned business
realignment. The company was upbeat on its prospects for the fiscal year
2001, saying e-commerce would make up two-thirds of its business revenue
by the end of that period."
----
rayl...@home.xxx -- replace xxx with com to reply
donald tees
act. It could even result in a few lawsuits. If someone sold me a compiler
on the basis of it being royalty free on distribution, then changed the
rules drastically *after* I had paid my dollars and invested two or three
man years in software, I think I would see a lawyer at the same time that I
changed compilers.
It is a bit like selling a car, then after the purchase is paid for, telling
the customer that you have to buy gasoline at $100 per quart from the car
seller. I doubt very much if it is legally enforceable if the original
purchase did not have the restriction.
Raymond Leech wrote in message ...
Mayer Goldberg
On 4-Jun-2000, Raymond Leech <rayl...@home.xxx> wrote:
> "Merant said its fourth-quarter results will suffer at the hands of non-
> recurring charges of between 6 million and 9 million pounds ($9.51
> million to $14.26 million) as a result of its planned business
> realignment. The company was upbeat on its prospects for the fiscal year
> 2001, saying e-commerce would make up two-thirds of its business revenue
> by the end of that period."
Well... At least they're optimistic. :))
Mayer
donald tees
the lawyer's pocketbooks.
Robert Kovacic wrote in message ...
>I agree with your opinion about lawsuits. Unfortunately it would be
>financial suicide for a small software company such as ourselves to engage
>in a legal battle with a company the size of Merant.
>
>Regards, Robert Kovacic.
>
>donald tees wrote in message <8he5aj$8nb$1...@news.igs.net>...
Robert Kovacic
Rich Rohde
manager (he has taken this position over from Wayne Rippen). He
and I discussed the impact Merant's run-time fee will have on
my 'small' company. He will be recommending a restructuring of
the fee based on the sales price of the end user product. Oh
BTW, there is an annual maintenance fee on the run-time license
too! From this discussion, you would purchase a package of 10
licenses for US$870.00 and split the package between 10 clients,
so if you have 100 clients, it will cost you US$8,700.00. If I
heard John correctly, the maintenance on the package (again 10)
is US$170, so, for 100 clients, you would be looking at US$1700
annually.
A question to Merant, what will Merant do to help market my
product so 'they' and I will make the run-time license fee
profitable? If I put forth the effort to market and close sales
and all of the necessary steps to sell one package, they should
also participate in that risk. Why should Merant reap the
benefits of the work I perform?
I also asked of John, how are other COBOL vendors approaching
the license fee process and he indicated that most vendors do
charge a runtime fee (Fujitsu in Japan for example)? He
indicated that Merant (Micro Focus) has been charging a run-time
fee in Europe for many years and it is a part of the package and
those users in Europe have structured their pricing accordingly.
So my question (to the list using NetExpress), if we move from
Merant NetExpress to another COBOL compiler, what would prevent
that new COBOL vendor, not currently charging a run-time license
fee, to start charging a fee? I am sure the answer is, there is
NOTHING to prevent a COBOL vendor to start charging a run-time
fee!
Thanks for allowing me to express my views.
Regards,
brucepbarrett
"Rich Rohde" <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:00930600...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
Lucas, Todd
going to do. I have been dealing with MF / Merant for a number of years
now and one thing I've learned is this - they want to make a buck no
matter what they need to do. Whether it's selling someone a product
that they don't need or will never use, or changing their policy on
run-time fees, the end result is the same - how much money can they
make?
Quite frankly, I am VERY surprised when I learned that basic parts of
the v3.0 RTS was royalty free! I couldn't believe it, then I read the
license agreement for myself - I was very pleased, thinking that they
(MF / Merant) had turned over a new leaf. Alas, all good things come to
an end no matter - no matter how short-lived they are!
TL
Mike Madara
1) There's nothing to stop the other compiler companies from
charging runtime fees. Fujitsu programmers, what are the
runtime fees, if any, associated with their product? But, I
think the major point per Merant in this thread is that an
add-on of $87 is too much for small developers to pass on to
their customers.
2) What motivated Merant to change the runtime fee structure
in NetExpress 3.0 to the new one in v 3.1? Is it that they
want to get out of the standalone/small developer business and
only want to support the 'big guys' that have large programming
shops, large amounts of users on the same servier and large
amounts of bucks to spend?
3) Are we sure we can 'split' the 10 runtime license pack to
mutilple servers/PCs? I've seen conflicting info in the
newsgroup. At last count, I had about 350 users for my app, and
in most cases they were running on different servers or PCs.
4) A couple of folks have brought up the point of sticking
with Workbench 4.0 or NetExpress 3.0. For the most
part, I totally agree. The only problem, as I see it, is that
they won't be updated to any new standard (2002?) that
comes out. This might be a problem in my shop since
the 'standards police' want us to keep current with
the ANSI standard whenever possible.
5) I 'grew up' using Micro Focus COBOL products to develop
apps for PCs and unix boxes. And overall, I've been very
happy with the products and their capabilities. I'd hate
to change after using their tools for 13 years, but the bottom
line is the bottom line. For everybody. How much heartburn
could one expect porting an Ansi '85 Merant COBOL app
to Fujitsu?
6) Plus, I'm still pissed off they did away with the annual users
conference!!! :) :) :)
Mike Madara
Prince Frederick, MD
Rich Rohde <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrotf:
Rich Rohde
mo...@chesapeake.net (Mike Madara) wrote:
>
>6) Plus, I'm still pissed off they did away with the annual
users
> conference!!! :) :) :)
I was wondering when someone would pick up on this.
Bob7536
I spoke with John Billman this afternoon who is the NetExpress product manager
as Rich had mentioned earlier. From talking with John this new pricing plan is
not cast in stone and people at Merant are listening to what the developers
have to say. John mentioned a number of other ideas that others in this thread
have also mentioned (i.e. a percentage of the retail instead of a set fee).
John also mentioned something that was noted here before that I was unaware of
the fact there could be an ongoing maintenance charge for the end user runtime
license. He mentioned that this has been about 21% of the original runtime
fee. There is not way the my company can afford to spend $18.00 ( 84.70 * .21)
per year per end user. I think the people at Merant are beginning to
understand that small developers can not afford to spend a one time fee of
$84.70 plus a yearly fee of $18.00 per customer. From speaking with John it
appears that most compilier companies charge runtimes fees outside of the US.
For instance I am told Fujistu charges a runtime fee in Japan. Could some of
our international developers please comment ? In closing I believe they are
starting to listen. I am enclosing the e-mail addresses of the top people in
Merant management. If you have not done so please e-mail them with your
concerns.
Robert Kovacic
mid-stream. ie. No company should be put in a position where it develops a
business plan, commits many man-years and $'s of development and support
resources and then finds that it is financially unviable because of a large
new overhead cost per product (viz. runtime fees). Continually changing this
cost based on how loudly developers scream also does nothing for a
sustainable business plan.
I have decided to go with Fujitsu COBOL (which we were already using for
some small projects) based on their "commitment" in the Frequently Asked
Questions at http://www.adtools.com/products/windows/cobol.htm#8.
However after seeing some other messages in this newsgroup which indicate
they do apply runtime fees in Japan, and their recent imposition of runtime
fees on threaded faciliites, I am reconsidering.
Unless a compiler vendor such as Fujitsu can respond positively to this
issue I am afraid that COBOL development on PC's will die completely and our
only choice will be to move to languages such as Visual C, Visual Basic,
Delphi, etc.
With these other languages I believe that any attempt at imposing runtime
fees similar to COBOL (ie. for simple compiled programs - NOT for add-on
products) would be howled down by a storm of protest. These other languages
may be the only viable way for small software developers to survive and
prosper.
A copy of this has been sent to supp...@adtools.com (Fujitsu) and I would
urge them to also send a response to this newsgroup (comp.lang.cobol).
Regards, Robert Kovacic.
Rich Rohde <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:00930600...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
Thane Hubbell
<richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>A question to Merant, what will Merant do to help market my
>product so 'they' and I will make the run-time license fee
>profitable? If I put forth the effort to market and close sales
>and all of the necessary steps to sell one package, they should
>also participate in that risk. Why should Merant reap the
>benefits of the work I perform?
>
This is conjecture - but I think you can see this. For your
development tool's maint fee, you get support for your devleopment.
However, when you deploy in the field and you find something that just
doesn't work - you call Merant for support. They are now supporting
your in the field install of their runtime. I do think they might
deserve some money for this.
FOR THE RECORD - I HATE RUNTIME FEES. However, that said, I am also a
reasonable person. Here is the letter *I* sent to Merant:
Good Day Gentlemen,
First let me introduce myself. My name is Thane Hubbell and I am
the author of Sams Teach Yourself COBOL in 24 Hours. In
addition, I've found myself in the position of being a major COBOL
apologist in the internet community. I'm a COBOL advocate and
enthusiast. My articles have appeared in IEEE Software
magazine, and in "The COBOL Report".
I am employed full time as a COBOL programmer, but also do
development work and consulting on the side. I have a couple of
end user software systems written in COBOL that sell for between
$50.00 and $500.00.
Previously I worked for a Retail Store service company that utilized
MicroFocus Work Bench and Dialog System in their product
development. I've closely watched Micro Focus over the years
(having been a user of the 1.1 product through NetExpress 2.0).
I'm writing to you, as I am sure you have guessed, about the
apparently new -- or perhaps only clarified -- Runtime Fee policy
with respect to distributing applications developed using
NetExpress.
Let me explain that I do not presently utilize Merant products for
my development. I am simply writing because I feel that the recent
actions are bad for COBOL in general. Merant is the recognized
World leader in developing COBOL tools. As goes Merant, so
goes the industry. In my development I use Ca-Realia COBOL and
Fujitsu COBOL - both offering Royalty free runtime systems.
Considering my price point, this is a necessity.
However, as an individual who desires that COBOL continues to
thrive, I can recognize the need for a continuing revenue stream for
COBOL tool developers. Many achieve this by maintenance fees.
However, many small developers such as myself, often find
themselves not renewing maintenance, in a cost savings measure.
I would like to offer you a solution to these problems that is fair
and
equitable and that should be accepted by any of your reasonable
customers.
As I mentioned at the beginning of my letter, I am a book author. I
get paid for my work via a Royalty. I get a certain percentage of
the unit cost of my book when a retailer purchases it for resale.
Rather than a fixed price for your runtime system, I would like to
recommend that you move to a percentage based royalty solution.
This would allow small developers and large developers alike to
share their success using your products to develop software, with
you - the provider of the development software. Charge a 5%
runtime fee based on the selling price of the software that is
developed with your tools. If the developer charges a yearly
maintenance fee, you would get 5% of this fee as well. Cap the
high end of the fee for extremely large software sales if larger price
point customers are concerned. Continue to charge your yearly
maintenance fees to support the developers. The continuing
Royalty revenue will be good for your company, and will NOT be a
severe burden on existing or new customers.
One concern I have heard voiced is in the area of upgrades for
existing customers of the developers. With software deployed that
is paid for by the end user already, the developer cannot expect
these end users to pay for the new runtime fee. I recommend
waiving the fee for those users until such time as their customers
pay an upgrade or maintenance fee, at which point you would
receive your royalty percentage.
The only area this leaves uncovered is in Web based or internet
based applications. If these applications are in house, I would
charge a per server runtime royalty based on the actual usage or
capacity of the server. If the application is an ASP type of
application where the users pay to access it, I would revert to the
per end customer royalty percentage. If the application is a free
application accessed on the internet by the public, I would waive
the runtime fee -- the company is not receiving any direct revenue
from the product.
In closing, I hope you find my ideas useful and adoptable. I think
you will find widespread acceptance where currently you are finding
that you have alienated a large portion of the COBOL development
community.
Thank you for your time in reading my thoughts.
Respectfully,
Thane Hubbell
Raymond Leech
sure the deal would be 'upgrading indicates your acceptance...' or some
such crud. There used to be a $50/seat fee (before discount) for some of
the MF runtime stuff. It was a happy day when that was over. As someone
else said, 'good things come to an end'... too bad. I thought they had
finally seen the light of other PC tools with no or low runtimes, guess
I called that one wrong.
I'd like to hear from people using another compiler. What are the "after
purchase" fees (support, royalty, runtime, etc)? After almost 16 years
with MF, maybe its time to review my options.
In article <8he5aj$8nb$1...@news.igs.net>, don...@willmack.com says...
> I think they are going to be in real trouble if they do not clean up their
> act. It could even result in a few lawsuits. If someone sold me a compiler
Thane Hubbell
wrote:
>Per Rich's points made below:
>
>1) There's nothing to stop the other compiler companies from
> charging runtime fees. Fujitsu programmers, what are the
> runtime fees, if any, associated with their product? But, I
> think the major point per Merant in this thread is that an
> add-on of $87 is too much for small developers to pass on to
> their customers.
>
The basic runtime with Fujitsu is Free. The PowerCOBOL runtime is
free. The Multi-Threaded runtime is $40.00 per install, with a
sliding scale downward based on volume. The PowerBsort runtime is
$225.00 per user per install. (They are right proud of that one, but
it's optional).
Raymond Leech
I agree Merant should be paid for 'field support' but I think the per-
incident phone support covers this. If something goes wrong in the field
and I cant reproduce it locally, calling for support is usually the last
thing on my list. Now if Merant were offering to take the calls for me,
the $85 would be a steal!!!
For example, just today a client who is still using a 4.0.38 build of
the product found a problem. After examing everything, it looks like the
compiler simply generated some bad object code. Works great as INT but
fails as GNT or OBJ. Examined the data at every stage with a hexeditor
and the variable is zero (x"30"). But in the code fragment below,
"statement" gets executed every time unless running as INT. Regardless
if the client or I found it, a bug is a bug. Now, had I missed a period
somewhere (or something else I did wrong), then I'd say charge me the
phone support fee for my mistake. In my mind, that certainly doesnt
justify a royalty.
if variable = 2 or variable = 3
statement
end-if
By the way, change it to the following and it works great in INT, GNT or
OBJ.
if variable = 2
statement
end-if
if variable = 3
statement
end-if
In article <393c5b2a...@news.cox-internet.com>,
tha...@softwaresimple.com says...
> This is conjecture - but I think you can see this. For your
> development tool's maint fee, you get support for your devleopment.
> However, when you deploy in the field and you find something that just
> doesn't work - you call Merant for support. They are now supporting
> your in the field install of their runtime. I do think they might
> deserve some money for this.
tonyhi...@my-deja.com
reponsibilities include Net Express.
On behalf of MERANT, I would like to thank all contributors to this and
related threads. Please continue to share your views and suggestions.
They are very helpful to us. On the back of this discussion, I have
instigated a thorough review of our run-time pricing policy and so your
continued involvement is most welcome. I will communicate the results
of this investigation within the next 10 days.
Finally, thanks again for your interest in MERANT. Please feel free to
e-mail me directly on tony...@merant.com if you have any urgent
comments.
Regards
Tony Hill
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
donald tees
Robert Kovacic wrote in message
>I think one of the fundamental issues with Runtime Fees is their impostion
>mid-stream. ie. No company should be put in a position where it develops a
>business plan, commits many man-years and $'s of development and support
>resources and then finds that it is financially unviable because of a large
>new overhead cost per product (viz. runtime fees). Continually changing
this
>cost based on how loudly developers scream also does nothing for a
>sustainable business plan.
>
Yes. I know of no other language that imposes this kind of nonsense ... it
is close to making me rethink Cobol.
It is not just the problem of putting a product into the too expensive
realm. There is also the problem of demo's, and the problem of any kind of
shareware. In effect, no MF Cobol project can ever be given away, or
demonstrated on a customer machine.
It is doubtful that anybody would ever buy an expensive software package
without seeing it. Merant's policy makes it impossible for me to make a CD
and send it to a customer. That means it is unsellable. The package can
only be used "in-house".
Bob7536
I received an e-mail from Tony Hill who is the general manager of the ACT
business unit (MicroFocus) at Merant. He has told me there will be a
resolution to this issue in the next ten days. He told me they are listening
to the e-mails they are receiving.
Thanks,
Bob Hennessey
David W. Furin
(snip)
> 6) Plus, I'm still pissed off they did away with the annual users
> conference!!! :) :) :)
>
This is a pet peeve of mine as well. The user conference was the best
place to button-hole your favorite Micro Focus person, learn about new
things first-hand, and do a little complaining face-to-face (if
necessary).
Since there was no user conference this year, the customer feedback--in
this case highly negative feedback--has moved here. Someone mentioned
elsewhere in this thread that MERANT is listening, and the pricing
policy may not be set in stone. Perhaps if MERANT had not distanced
themselves from their customers they wouldn't have been so surprised at
the raw nerve they touched. Backpedalling is never good for a corporate
image.
Besides, my family is mad at me because they were hoping to go back to
Disney World! :)
--
David Furin | email: dfu...@larich.com
| smail: 2600 St. Clair Ave. NE
Information Systems Manager | Cleveland, OH 44114 USA
LaRich Distributors, Inc. | web: http://www.larich.com
Thane Hubbell
<dfu...@larich.com> wrote:
>Besides, my family is mad at me because they were hoping to go back to
>Disney World! :)
>
CA-World 2001 is in Orlando <G>.
Norman Juers
The problem with using a percentage of the sale price is trying to establish
the sale price. We sell a service where we give away the software as part
of our service. What is the price of the software in this case. I'm sure
that MERANT would not be happy with 5% of nothing. We charge for annual
maintenance on our product but not all of that is for the software. Part is
to cover support. I'm not going to give 5% of my support revenue to MERANT.
I don't believe that software products should be subject to an annual fee.
I would agree that a percentage is preferable to a fee of $87.40.
Thane Hubbell <tha...@softwaresimple.com> wrote in message
news:393c5b2a...@news.cox-internet.com...
James J. Gavan
Thane Hubbell wrote:
>
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:29:37 -0700, Rich Rohde
> <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >
> >A question to Merant, what will Merant do to help market my
> >product so 'they' and I will make the run-time license fee
> >profitable? If I put forth the effort to market and close sales
> >and all of the necessary steps to sell one package, they should
> >also participate in that risk. Why should Merant reap the
> >benefits of the work I perform?
> >
>
> This is conjecture - but I think you can see this. For your
> development tool's maint fee, you get support for your devleopment.
> However, when you deploy in the field and you find something that just
> doesn't work - you call Merant for support. They are now supporting
> your in the field install of their runtime. I do think they might
> deserve some money for this.
>
> FOR THE RECORD - I HATE RUNTIME FEES. However, that said, I am also a
> reasonable person. Here is the letter *I* sent to Merant:
>
> Good Day Gentlemen....... <Snip>
Just read this one Thane - I just think it is too damn complicated. This
is providing a compromise solution to a problem which shouldn't have
happened. I don't know the practicalities of this, but it seems to me
that a more realistic and simpler approach would be to charge an
up-front fee for the development suite, a cost per module.
Take NetExpress as it currently stands, (and this is not an exhaustive
list) :-
- Base compiler (includes 'standard' features - Screen handling,
flat files, Win APIs etc. - and the IDE and Animator)
- OO and OO GUIs
- Dialog System
- Fileshare
- Web stuff (Internet, HTML, ActiveX, Java etc.. )
- etc.......
Have a pricing structure for each of the modules. Currently I use :-
- Base compiler
- OO and OO GUIs
If I want to get into Fileshare and Web stuff then obviously I'm
producing more than just a simple one-off system for a single client.
Merant would be justified in charging me an up-front fee for these
additional modules; reflect this is how they did it in DOS with Toolbox
etc.. - and on the basis that the end-user is wanting multi-user or Web
access I am also justified in passing on these costs as part of my
charges to him/her.
From the Merant perspective if I'm only using the modules I've indicated
then they only have to offer me technical support for those specific
modules. (Other than my initial queries about OO GUIs when I first
started - they currently don't get any questions from me on the
Answerlab. I get the sort of answers I want from this NewsGroup).
I noticed that Howard took a slightly 'holier than thou' attitude about
runtime fees. It's OK for you buster, the U of C pays for the software
you use !
Meanwhile this all blew up while I was in UK - and I haven't received a
notification that Version 3.1 was available, although I knew it was
imminent. So Bob or Rich, ignoring the sales blurb about V3.1 on the
Merant site, if you have it, care to send me a copy of the readme file
telling me what if any new features there are that would justify my
upgrading to V3.1 - and oh yes - any dollars involved over and above the
very questionable runtime fees ?
Jimmy
Paddy Coleman
If you existing Net Express 3.0 product is under a MERANT
maintenance contract then there is no charge for upgrading
to Net Express 3.1. Simply contact your local MERANT office
and they will arrange for the product to be sent to you.
A summary of the new features are:
COBOL and Java interoperability.
Support for Enterprise Java Beans (EJB).
Combination class support.
OLE automation enhancements.
SQL Option for DB2.
OpenESQL enhancements.
Large file support in the data tools.
Production debugging and diagnostic tools.
Animator enhancements.
Dialog System enhancements.
Revolve integration.
Support for Microsoft Termninal Server.
Support for IBM WebSphere 3.0 Enterprise Edition.
Support for Microsoft Windows 2000.
Support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.
Support for Siemens BS2000 COBOL dialect.
Hope this helps.
Paddy Coleman
Manager, E-Business Support, EMEA
MERANT International.
James J. Gavan <jjg...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3947CBF4...@home.com...
>
>
> Thane Hubbell wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:29:37 -0700, Rich Rohde
> > <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >A question to Merant, what will Merant do to help market my
> > >product so 'they' and I will make the run-time license fee
> > >profitable? If I put forth the effort to market and close sales
> > >and all of the necessary steps to sell one package, they should
> > >also participate in that risk. Why should Merant reap the
> > >benefits of the work I perform?
> > >
> >
> > This is conjecture - but I think you can see this. For your
> > development tool's maint fee, you get support for your devleopment.
> > However, when you deploy in the field and you find something that just
> > doesn't work - you call Merant for support. They are now supporting
> > your in the field install of their runtime. I do think they might
> > deserve some money for this.
> >
> > FOR THE RECORD - I HATE RUNTIME FEES. However, that said, I am also a
> > reasonable person. Here is the letter *I* sent to Merant:
> >
Rich Rohde
You neglected to mention that many fixes (including at least
6 'cases' I reported) to NE 3.0 are included with NE 3.1 NOT
3.0, but since there is a license fee to distribute NE 3.1, I
just flushed a years worth of maintaince fees down the toilet.
My maintenance agreement comes due next month and I will
seriously consider dropping support due to Merants effort to
weed out the small users of NetExpress.
I have spent most of my effort discussing the lack of printing
support with the PC_PRINT... library routines and many of those
changes have now been implemented, but with 3.1 not 3.0.
I believe I have arrived to the conclusion Merant should wave
runtime fees for companies using NetExpress prior to NE 3.1. My
reasoning is that we have de-bugged NetExpress and have given
direction for the enhancements you have listed.
One major concern about NetExpress 3.1, the product did not go
through the beta testing 3.0 had gone through and with the
problems 3.0 had should we be concerned about the quality of 3.1?
James J. Gavan
Paddy Coleman wrote:
>
> James,
>
> If you existing Net Express 3.0 product is under a MERANT
> maintenance contract then there is no charge for upgrading
> to Net Express 3.1. Simply contact your local MERANT office
> and they will arrange for the product to be sent to you.
>
> A summary of the new features are:
>
> COBOL and Java interoperability.
> Support for Enterprise Java Beans (EJB).
> Combination class support.
> OLE automation enhancements.
> SQL Option for DB2.
> OpenESQL enhancements.
> Large file support in the data tools.
> Production debugging and diagnostic tools.
> Animator enhancements.
> Dialog System enhancements.
> Revolve integration.
> Support for Microsoft Termninal Server.
> Support for IBM WebSphere 3.0 Enterprise Edition.
> Support for Microsoft Windows 2000.
> Support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.
> Support for Siemens BS2000 COBOL dialect.
>
Many thanks Paddy. But you don't refer to either OO or OO GUIs which I
use. Care to comment on any specifics relating to these two - like -
maybe some examples etc... ? Although your site has many useful example
programs for general, Dialog System etc. - OO/GUIs - ZILCH !
Jimmy
Ken Mullins
customers? Any formal announcement on runtime fees for NE 3.1 vs. 3.0?
all I have seen is the chat here on newsgroup...
kenmullins
Rich Rohde
2000), but that was about a week ago.
Paddy Coleman
I cannot comment on your particular fixes. However, all new releases of
software
contain fixes. I know that Microsoft have fixed a few things in Windows
2000 and
that these issues have not and probably will not be addressed in NT 4.0.
I can honestly say that I am not aware of any "effort" to weed out small
users
of Net Express. My Team supports Customers of varying sizes (in EMEA) and
we aim to provide the best level of Customer care we can. At present my
department has the highest Customer satisfaction rating in MERANT (>90%).
We agree that you should have access to the latest fixes and features. That
is why
we provide new releases of software to Customers on maintenance for no
additional charge.
As for runtime charges - see Tony Hill's (my big boss <g>) previous posting.
As I said above, my Team supports Net Express on a daily basis. Net Express
3.1 has been available since May 11th and we have not had any major problems
with it. So far the quality looks very good and seems to build on 3.0.
Hope this helps.
Paddy Coleman
Manager, E-Business Support, EMEA
MERANT International
Rich Rohde <richNO...@richware.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:056faa27...@usw-ex0105-040.remarq.com...
> Paddy,
>
> You neglected to mention that many fixes (including at least
> 6 'cases' I reported) to NE 3.0 are included with NE 3.1 NOT
> 3.0, but since there is a license fee to distribute NE 3.1, I
> just flushed a years worth of maintaince fees down the toilet.
> My maintenance agreement comes due next month and I will
> seriously consider dropping support due to Merants effort to
> weed out the small users of NetExpress.
>
> I have spent most of my effort discussing the lack of printing
> support with the PC_PRINT... library routines and many of those
> changes have now been implemented, but with 3.1 not 3.0.
>
> I believe I have arrived to the conclusion Merant should wave
> runtime fees for companies using NetExpress prior to NE 3.1. My
> reasoning is that we have de-bugged NetExpress and have given
> direction for the enhancements you have listed.
>
> One major concern about NetExpress 3.1, the product did not go
> through the beta testing 3.0 had gone through and with the
> problems 3.0 had should we be concerned about the quality of 3.1?
>
Ken Mullins
> I can honestly say that I am not aware of any "effort" to weed out small
> May 11th and we have not had any major problems with it. <
Why have customers like myself, who are indeed on maintenance, not been
formally notified (in writing) of 3.1's release, availability, enhancements
and associated fees?
kenmullins
jbb...@my-deja.com
Please see http://www.merant.com/ads/dc/products/netex30.asp for
details of Net Express 3.1
Upgrade letters to all Net Express customers on maintenance will be on
the way soon.
John.
Paddy Coleman
I am afraid I cannot comment on this. I can tell you that my own
people have been informing Customers in EMEA since its launch.
I have forwarded your note to the Product Management group
and asked them to respond to you directly.
All the best.
Paddy Coleman
Manager, E-Business Support, EMEA
MERANT International
Ken Mullins <**Ken**Mullins**@**mindspring.com** remove **'s> wrote in
message news:8icuue$3q1$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Brad Stark
I am very concerned about the flip-flopping on the runtime fees, but
you should be congratulated on the increased quality of support. When
we first started our relationship with Micro Focus, the support left a
LOT to be desired. It's not perfect today, but you're really going in
the right direction.
Brad Stark
David W. Furin
>
> Ken,
>
> I am afraid I cannot comment on this. I can tell you that my own
> people have been informing Customers in EMEA since its launch.
>
What is EMEA?
John.B...@merant.com
colleagues in US Support have also been talking to customers about Net
Express 3.1
Please see http://www.merant.com/ads/dc/products/netex30.asp for the
full Data Sheet/Announcement for Net Express 3.1.
Standard Upgrade Letters are in the pipeline for SupportNet Customers
John.
Paddy Coleman
Thank you for your kind comments. We try really hard to
deliver the best service(s) we can to our Customers. We are
not perfect and we know that. However, we are investing
heavily in our staff and I am glad to see that this is beginning
to pay dividends.
All the best and have a great weekend.
Paddy Coleman
Manager, E-Business Support, EMEA
MERANT International
Brad Stark <brad...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8idh7n$r0b$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Paddy,
>
> I am very concerned about the flip-flopping on the runtime fees, but
> you should be congratulated on the increased quality of support. When
> we first started our relationship with Micro Focus, the support left a
> LOT to be desired. It's not perfect today, but you're really going in
> the right direction.
>
> Brad Stark
>
>
Paddy Coleman
EMEA is "Europe, Middle East and Africa".
Paddy Coleman
Manager, E-Business, EMEA
MERANT International
David W. Furin <dfu...@larich.com> wrote in message
news:394A4418...@larich.com...