Customer Advisory Board
Thom O'Connor
The Customer Advisory Board is an active board meeting four times a
year, and the interests of the members are heavily considered in future
product direction. For the last year or so, I have run this meeting.
Input on the mailing list is also strongly considered for requests,
suggestions, thoughts on licensing, etc. The very nature of the mailing
list suggests that it is most often used by customers who are less apt
to contact Support directly - if supported/maintained customers have
Support issues, they are likely to contact Support directly, as is
defined in their Support agreement, SLAs, 24x7 support, etc.
It might be a mistake to think that the Mailing List is necessarily
representative of our entire customer base, but the opinions of the list
are important to us. And we do obviously have some work to do on
communication to this base (especially with licensing issues, and
hopefully quick implementation of a licensing dashboard or mechanism by
which someone simply cannot run a version for which they are not
licensed - these are perfectly reasonable requests).
To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a
Support contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not the
mailing list.
It's probably worthwhile to note that few currently-supported customers
encountered the licensing problems of the last few days, because
customers actively under support/maintenance with current licenses would
also have continued access to all versions of CommuniGate Pro. For
obvious reasons, we invite Customer Advisory Board members (current and
future) from active and supported customers, and to date we have
typically chosen them from the larger ones. However, I like the idea of
perhaps providing a way to better represent different types of customers
in an advisory board, and will take this into consideration. Contact me
directly if you would like to discuss this.
As I think I've noted here in the past, please also email me if you have
feature requests, as I closely manage the tracking of those requests.
In conclusion - CommuniGate/Stalker does regret and apologize for the
confusion around licensing, and will work to improve these matters.
Licensing is a cost of doing business which is costly for us as well as
our customers, but it is a matter of necessity - CommuniGate Pro is not
nor will it be an open-source or free product. As always, I would
encourage you to contact CommuniGate Support, Sales, or myself if you
have ongoing issues, or would like to discuss these matters further.
We will work hard to better communicate with you.
Sincerely,
-t
--
Thom O'Connor
Director, Product Architecture
CommuniGate Systems
http://www.communigate.com
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <CGat...@mail.stalker.com>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CGateP...@mail.stalker.com>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CGatePr...@mail.stalker.com>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CGatePr...@mail.stalker.com>
Send administrative queries to <CGatePro...@mail.stalker.com>
Tom Rymes
> The Customer Advisory Board is an active board meeting four times a
> year, and the interests of the members are heavily considered in
> future product direction. For the last year or so, I have run this
> meeting.
That's good to know. I'm sure those meetings are helpful to Stalker,
but it doesn't look to me that any of those people ever get their
hands dirty by actually interacting with the product from an admin
perspective. I think another, possibly more informal group would be
helpful as well. Meeting more than 4 times annually might be good, too.
> Input on the mailing list is also strongly considered for requests,
> suggestions, thoughts on licensing, etc.
Now all that's missing is the feedback to the list letting us know!
> It might be a mistake to think that the Mailing List is necessarily
> representative of our entire customer base,
Boy would that ever be a big mistake! The list is definitely not
representative of the user base as a whole, but it *is* a group of
people who are intimately associated with the product.
> To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a
> Support contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not
> the mailing list.
Why doesn't anyone get this? E-mail is a terrible medium for anything
urgent.
> For obvious reasons, we invite Customer Advisory Board members
> (current and future) from active and supported customers, and to
> date we have typically chosen them from the larger ones. However, I
> like the idea of perhaps providing a way to better represent
> different types of customers in an advisory board, and will take
> this into consideration. Contact me directly if you would like to
> discuss this.
I think you should have large clustered customers, small biz single
server types, ISPs, MAPI types, non-MAPI types, etc. You might also
want to look into having "in the trenches" people as well as CTOs,
VPs, etc. (of course, small biz types will wear both of those hats if
you include them.)
> In conclusion - CommuniGate/Stalker does regret and apologize for
> the confusion around licensing, and will work to improve these
> matters. Licensing is a cost of doing business which is costly for
> us as well as our customers, but it is a matter of necessity -
> CommuniGate Pro is not nor will it be an open-source or free
> product. As always, I would encourage you to contact CommuniGate
> Support, Sales, or myself if you have ongoing issues, or would like
> to discuss these matters further.
Thank you. I think that an advisory board, formal, informal, whatever
would be helpful by allowing you to preview any changes,
communications, etc and get feedback before you implement them. for
example, one year ago, you could have asked 10 customers "Hey here's
what were doing, here's how we're going to announce it, what do you
think?" and gotten their feedback on clarity, better ideas, etc.
Also, two weeks ago you could have posted "Heads up to anyone running
4.2.8!!!! This version will die if you have an invalid key installed
on/after Nov. 1. Please upgrade to 4.2.10 if you license was
purchased between X date and y date. If your license was purchased
before z date, you will need to downgrade to 4.1.8 or earlier. Please
contact us directly over the phone at (xxx) xxx-xxxx if you are
running 4.2.8 and are in any way uncertain about which version of our
software you should be running.
If nothing else, I would like to see Stalker provide too much info
too far in advance for a change. It's certainly better than the
alternative.
Anyhow, buena suerte.
Tom
PS: Sent to the list on purpose in case anyone wonders.
Tom Rymes
> On Nov 3, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Thom O'Connor wrote:
>
>> The Customer Advisory Board is an active board meeting four times
>> a year, and the interests of the members are heavily considered in
>> future product direction. For the last year or so, I have run this
>> meeting.
>
> That's good to know. I'm sure those meetings are helpful to
> Stalker, but it doesn't look to me that any of those people ever
> get their hands dirty by actually interacting with the product from
> an admin perspective. I think another, possibly more informal group
> would be helpful as well. Meeting more than 4 times annually might
> be good, too.
[snip]
Just a clarification, folks. Someone contacted me off-list and
mentioned that my posting could be misconstrued (and NO they don't
work for stalker...):
1.) I am actually a happy Stalker customer. I think the product rocks
and every time I have had occasion to call them the service has been
outstanding. In fact, I post with suggestions because I want to make
sure Stalker gets it right. I want to make sure that Stalker and
CGPro are both around for a long time to come!
2.) I did not mean to imply that the CAB isn't doing a good job. On
the contrary, I'm sure that they are. I simply think that Stalker's
customer base is diverse, and the effectiveness of the group might be
further improved if the membership reflected the customer base. (ie:
Small, medium and large biz, ISPs, small and large .edu customers all
represented.)
3.) I still think that a dedicated employee would be best, but a
representative CAB works, too.
Sorry if there was any confusion. Someone thought I was bad-mouthing
the CAB, and that was not my intention.
Tom
Eric Campbell
Your statements (below) are absolutely mind boggling. Calling/emailing
support is always my last option.
Why? Because the internet at large & this discussion group specifically are
a much better source of immediate information than contacting a support
technician (in the majority of cases).
Example:
A few months ago, we had a few Dells that suddenly died after an MS update.
A co-worker of mine got on the phone to Dell support. I went to Google and
the Dell forums.
Who do you think figured out the problem and solution faster? I had the
problem solved while my coworker was still trying to get the tech support
guy to understand the problem.
Unless you've experienced "in the trenches" troubleshooting, you will have a
difficult time truly understanding this.
Please Please Please trust us on this: This forum is where the real issues
are discussed by the real users - it has nothing to do with money for
support, it is all about the fact that dozens of intelligent & immediate
responses by real users will win out over a tech support call 90% of the
time.
>>if supported/maintained customers have
>>Support issues, they are likely to contact Support directly, as is
>>defined in their Support agreement, SLAs, 24x7 support, etc.
>>To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a
>>Support contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not the
>>mailing list.
#############################################################
Eric Campbell
I (and most forum users) are inherently altruistic:
I like helping other people
I like the "thanks" I sometimes get
I like the fact that years from now, some poor guy might be desperately
Googling an error message he's getting on his server in the middle of the
night & MY response will show up in the search results and help him out of a
jam.
You've got to appreciate that most IT folks (socially inept as they may be
portrayed) like to help & will always favor discussion forums.
Sincerely,
Eric Campbell
(PS sorry about the two emails in a row, I just thought this was pretty
important to get across)
Thom O'Connor
> Unless you've experienced "in the trenches" troubleshooting, you will have a
> difficult time truly understanding this.
Uh, please - you've made a mistaken assumption here. I've spent more
time in the trenches, in ice cold data centers in the summer, at 4am, on
the road, while sick, with multi-million dollar equipment that won't
boot, won't run, with vendors on the phone, in the air, searching on
google, usenet, man pages...the stories I could tell. 10+ years in UNIX
consulting (trench warfare) and I'm being accused of...what exactly?
Perhaps you're not aware (or perhaps you just shouldn't assume)...but
anyway, I've personally designed, customized, and/or implemented
messaging systems (and in many of these cases, from start to finish) for
"little" customers such as DoubleClick, So-Net Japan, IIJ, Disney, Wells
Fargo, Genentech, the Governor of California, the U.S. House of
Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and many many comparable others...
> Please Please Please trust us on this: This forum is where the real issues
> are discussed by the real users - it has nothing to do with money for
> support, it is all about the fact that dozens of intelligent & immediate
> responses by real users will win out over a tech support call 90% of the
> time.
And yet, as you may note, you don't often see these customers posting
support questions here, hmmm makes you wonder...these "real users" don't
ever need support?
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers.htm
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers_full.html#isp
http://www.stalker.com/content/CABmembers.html
Look, I'm in no way trying to denigrate the value of a mailing list -
mailing lists are of great assistance as a data repository of
(sometimes) accurate information. But, if you need Support, and you need
it now, you should go to the source for best results.
Cheers,
-t
Michael Wise
Hmmm, I know one of the CAB members listed and have been personal
friends with the founder of his company for about ten years...and I know
for a fact they have only recently used CGP. When I mentioned CGP to the
owner nearly a year ago, he hadn't even heard of it.
What does it take to be a CAB member anyway?
--Mike
John C. Welch
>
> Hmmm, I know one of the CAB members listed and have been personal
> friends with the founder of his company for about ten years...and I know
> for a fact they have only recently used CGP. When I mentioned CGP to the
> owner nearly a year ago, he hadn't even heard of it.
>
>
> What does it take to be a CAB member anyway?
A spiffy logo?
--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwe...@bynkii.com
Karl Zander
>To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a Support
>contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not the mailing list.
Huh??.... Over the years I have been very impressed with the depth and
breadth of knowledge available through this list from Dmitry, Roman and
others from Stalker and certainly Vladimir! And regular contributors to
the list add at least as much knowledge. Do you really want us to start
calling/emailing mostly Support when we have questions? What an incredible
loss of shared knowledge that would be. Sure there are things that are
best handled directly with support. But for a lot of stuff, I figure if I
have a question about it, so might someone else, so share it. I am not
opposed to contacting Support directly, but why loose the shared
knowledge? Yes I know there are organizations that want to be able to call
someone when ever they have a problem. That's why there are support
contacts. I would like a balance between the two.
--Karl
Peter Back
Matt Ion
> Uh, please - you've made a mistaken assumption here. I've spent
> more time in the trenches, in ice cold data centers in the
> summer, at 4am, on the road, while sick, with multi-million
> dollar equipment that won't boot, won't run, with vendors on the
> phone, in the air, searching on google, usenet, man pages...the
> stories I could tell. 10+ years in UNIX consulting (trench
> warfare) and I'm being accused of...what exactly?
>
> Perhaps you're not aware (or perhaps you just shouldn't
> assume)...but anyway, I've personally designed, customized,
> and/or implemented messaging systems (and in many of these cases,
> from start to finish) for "little" customers such as DoubleClick,
> So-Net Japan, IIJ, Disney, Wells Fargo, Genentech, the Governor
> of California, the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S.
> Senate, and many many comparable others...
Oh yeah, well my dad can beat up your dad! :) :) :)
(Sorry, just felt the need to lighten things up a bit in here...)
Vladimir A. Butenko
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 21:11:31 -0500
Karl Zander <cgp...@commpartners.com> wrote:
> At 11:57 AM 11/3/2005 -0800, you wrote:
>
>>To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a Support
>>contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not the mailing
>>list.
>
>
> Huh??.... Over the years I have been very impressed with the depth and
>breadth of knowledge available through this list from Dmitry, Roman and
>others from Stalker and certainly Vladimir! And regular contributors to
>the list add at least as much knowledge. Do you really want us to start
>calling/emailing mostly Support when we have questions? What an incredible
>loss of shared knowledge that would be. Sure there are things that are
>best handled directly with support. But for a lot of stuff, I figure if I
>have a question about it, so might someone else, so share it. I am not
>opposed to contacting Support directly, but why loose the shared knowledge?
> Yes I know there are organizations that want to be able to call someone
>when ever they have a problem. That's why there are support contacts.
> I would like a balance between the two.
Let us clarify the things here. No, we do not want neither to stop this
list, nor to abandon it.
Our employees participating in this list are not professional lawyers. And
when the things like the recent outbreak of "sudden problems" pop up, they
have to refrain from talking to this list, to avoid possible
misinterpreations of their words.
There were numerous and various "threats" made by some individuals on this
list and directed towards not me personally (which would be OK), but towards
the company and all its employees. I sincerely hope that those statements
were accepted by those employees with understanding, condescension and calm,
and that those statements did not change their opinion about 2500 other
subscribers of this list. This makes me believe that our technical team will
re-join this list very soon.
Then. Mailing list is great - both as the archive of answers from our
technical staff, and as a method to quickly get help from peers. BUT DO NOT
EXPECT IT TO BE YOUR EMERGENCY SUPPORT LINE. If you are interested in this
or that feature, or you want to discuss how this or that thing works, or you
want to offer a new thing and discuss it with peers and us - the mailing
list is the best media.
But if something breaks, or something does not work as expected, and it
looks like a bug: you SHOULD write to sup...@stalker.com, not here. Then
noone will get into the situation where "I asked the list several times, and
I called my friend at Stalker, and noone could solve that problem for years,
and I'm frustrated now".
Yes, our support team works with those who paid for the support contracts.
But they do not work for them ONLY. If you do not have a support contract,
but you have a REAL and URGENT PROBLEM, not a "discussion topic" - please
contact sup...@stalker.com.
If the problem would appear to be a common case, they may ask you to post
the discussion here, so everybody can benefit.
> --Karl
Sincerely,
Vladimir
Dave Pooser
> technical staff, and as a method to quickly get help from peers. BUT DO NOT
> EXPECT IT TO BE YOUR EMERGENCY SUPPORT LINE.
Except that this list is functional at 2:00 AM Central Time, when your tech
support staff is not. My emergencies tend to fall outside of normal business
hours, and that's even more the case for folks outside the continental US.
--
Dave Pooser
Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
"...Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in one pretty and well-preserved piece, but to slide across the
finish line broadside, thoroughly used up, worn out, leaking oil, and
shouting GERONIMO!!!" -- Bill McKenna
R.I.P. Charles "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" Oriez, 1952-2005
Vladimir A. Butenko
Dave Pooser <dave-...@pooserville.com> wrote:
>> Then. Mailing list is great - both as the archive of answers from our
>> technical staff, and as a method to quickly get help from peers. BUT DO
>>NOT
>> EXPECT IT TO BE YOUR EMERGENCY SUPPORT LINE.
>
> Except that this list is functional at 2:00 AM Central Time, when your
>tech support staff is not.
Who did tell you that?! Have you ever tried to E-mail to sup...@stalker.com
at night?
> My emergencies tend to fall outside of normal business
> hours, and that's even more the case for folks outside the continental US.
That's why our support is 24x7x365, and that's why they are not based in US
only. As far as I understand it's about 1:00AM Central Time - you can, of
course, drop a message to them in 55 mins to just check my words. And I do
see them as "online" on my Windows Messenger screen.
And this list is actually dead now...
> --
> Dave Pooser
> Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
> "...Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
> safely in one pretty and well-preserved piece, but to slide across the
> finish line broadside, thoroughly used up, worn out, leaking oil, and
> shouting GERONIMO!!!" -- Bill McKenna
> R.I.P. Charles "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" Oriez, 1952-2005
Sincerely,
Vladimir
chuck goolsbee
I'm not dead yet, though I've had a few near-death experiences this week. =P
--
--chuck goolsbee
geek wrangler, digital.forest inc, seattle, wa <http://www.forest.net>
list mom, mac-mgrs mailing list... <http://www.mac-mgrs.org>
reluctant webmaster... <http://www.goolsbee.org>
useless blog... <http://chuck.goolsbee.org>
Dave Pooser
> at night?
Nope, only tried to call. In that case I got an answer from the list within
a few minutes so it turned out to be a non-issue. If your email support is
24-hours then I retract my earlier statement.
--
Dave Pooser
Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
"...Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving
safely in one pretty and well-preserved piece, but to slide across the
finish line broadside, thoroughly used up, worn out, leaking oil, and
shouting GERONIMO!!!" -- Bill McKenna
R.I.P. Charles "Socks the Whitehouse Cat" Oriez, 1952-2005
#############################################################
Gavin Lawrie
As I think I've noted here in the past, please also email me if you have feature requests, as I closely manage the tracking of those requests.
Mark J Strawcutter
> mailing lists are of great assistance as a data repository of
> (sometimes) accurate information.
Especially if Stalker is going to continue touting it as the "knowledge
base" component of their support services.
Mark
Mike Bacher
Michael Wise wrote:
> Hmmm, I know one of the CAB members listed and have been personal
> friends with the founder of his company for about ten years...and I know
> for a fact they have only recently used CGP. When I mentioned CGP to the
> owner nearly a year ago, he hadn't even heard of it.
>
>
> What does it take to be a CAB member anyway?
>
FWIW, we are a CAB member (we just asked to become one) and are not listed on
the CAB members page. We aren't a large organization by any stretch, and we
started using CGP back in 1998/99 under the traditional "ISP" license. We were
disappointed when Stalker changed course and went more towards Groupware, SIP,
etc, but thus far they've still taken care of us licensing-wise.
Like many on this list, we would prefer to see CGP continue to evolve as a mail
server and not necessarily a "multimedia communications platform" or whatever it
is evolving in to -- more anti-spam, mailing list, and other features that would
be directly useful to those still using CGP as a traditional mail server is what
we are advocating to the CAB board/members whenever we do get a chance to
provide our input.
--
-----------------------------------------
Mike Bacher / list...@tulsaconnect.com
TCIS - TulsaConnect Internet Services
http://www.tulsaconnect.com
-----------------------------------------
Karl Zander
>Then. Mailing list is great - both as the archive of answers from our
>technical staff, and as a method to quickly get help from peers. BUT DO
>this or that feature, or you want to discuss how this or that thing works,
>or you want to offer a new thing and discuss it with peers and us - the
>mailing list is the best media.
That's fair enough. If I have a support contract, and I then have an
emergency down, I would expect direct contact. But in tribute to
CommuniGate Pro the software and the coders, I have never had an
emergency. It just works. My questions tend to be more of the "How would
I do...?" nature or other things that if I don't get an immediate response,
I am not harmed. Ok....now watch karma come bite my for saying that and
cause an emergency for me. :-)
--Karl
Eric Campbell
You're right that I shouldn't assume -- I also shouldn't post when I'm in a
bad mood as I invariably regret the harsh tone the next day (i.e. sorry for
the harsh tone).
That said, I think the differences in my approach vs. your approach really
underline the need for a "small customer" advisory board (or something
similar)-- --or possibly two different licensing schemes (large vs. small
company OR purchase outright vs. yearly licensing OR stripped down mail
server vs. mega communications server).
Neither approach (call support vs. email group) is right or wrong but our
company (unrelated industry) puts resources into both as it seems some
customers prefer DIY and some want direct support. It makes life difficult
for our sales & support guys, but we know from past (somewhat painful)
experience that we need to keep the DIY customers in mind as well.
Bottom line:
Thanks for taking the time to respond -- I imagine you guys are, at least to
some extent, going through a transition period which can be tough. I only
hope you manage to keep the little guys happy while going after the big
fish.
Thanks,
Eric Campbell
-----Original Message-----
From: Thom O'Connor [mailto:th...@communigate.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 5:59 PM
To: CGat...@mail.stalker.com
Cc: Eric Campbell
Subject: Re: Customer Advisory Board
Eric Campbell wrote:
> Unless you've experienced "in the trenches" troubleshooting, you will
> have a difficult time truly understanding this.
Uh, please - you've made a mistaken assumption here. I've spent more
time in the trenches, in ice cold data centers in the summer, at 4am, on
the road, while sick, with multi-million dollar equipment that won't
boot, won't run, with vendors on the phone, in the air, searching on
google, usenet, man pages...the stories I could tell. 10+ years in UNIX
consulting (trench warfare) and I'm being accused of...what exactly?
Perhaps you're not aware (or perhaps you just shouldn't assume)...but
anyway, I've personally designed, customized, and/or implemented
messaging systems (and in many of these cases, from start to finish) for
"little" customers such as DoubleClick, So-Net Japan, IIJ, Disney, Wells
Fargo, Genentech, the Governor of California, the U.S. House of
Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and many many comparable others...
> Please Please Please trust us on this: This forum is where the real
> issues are discussed by the real users - it has nothing to do with
> money for support, it is all about the fact that dozens of intelligent
> & immediate responses by real users will win out over a tech support
> call 90% of the time.
And yet, as you may note, you don't often see these customers posting
support questions here, hmmm makes you wonder...these "real users" don't
ever need support?
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers.htm
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers_full.html#isp
http://www.stalker.com/content/CABmembers.html
Look, I'm in no way trying to denigrate the value of a mailing list -
mailing lists are of great assistance as a data repository of
(sometimes) accurate information. But, if you need Support, and you need
it now, you should go to the source for best results.
Cheers,
-t
Joe D'Andrea
>...FWIW, we are a CAB member (we just asked to become one) and are not listed on the CAB members page. We aren't a large organization by any stretch, and we started using CGP back in 1998/99 under the traditional "ISP" license. We were disappointed when Stalker changed course and went more towards Groupware, SIP, etc, but thus far they've still taken care of us licensing-wise.
Mike, can you define "traditional ISP" license? There are lots of us "small ISPs" who have really been abandoned by Stalker. You say Stalker has taken care of you licensing-wise, but I have the opposite experience. While I think it's within their right to bundle groupware, SIP, etc with CGP and charge whatever they want for it, I don't want the updated product. All I want is additional user licenses for the product I already own. There was always a path for providers to increase the number of accounts/user by purchasing additional licenses for those accounts/users. Now there is no such path. In order to get additional accounts/users for the current version I am using (4.2 or 4.3) I have to purchase "the new licensing scheme" (Stalker's sales person's words, not mine). As an example to add just 100 more users (200 current) to my system I have to pay more than I've already paid for the first 200.
~joe
John Keown
decision that they want to concentrate their business to the enterprise full
function sip voip and etc. They are concentrating on a single product and
market type. It may be a good decision for them in terms of both revenue and
support. All of us that are complaining went for stalker as a full function
advance mail server and that is all we want for the near future.
I though it would have been better for them to split the product into to two
products. 1) the traditional full function mail server, with partial mapi
support as they did originally. 2) a full service communications server as
they are now doing. However not knowing their cost structure and their
revenue split may not be worth it for them to do both products.
IMHO I believe there is a great deal of revenue to still be obtain from a
full function mail server. However it is stalker choice to convert to a high
end full function communications server and to let the plain full function
mail server eventually fade to some other vendor.
Mike Bacher
Joe D'Andrea wrote:
> Mike, can you define "traditional ISP" license? There are lots of us "small ISPs" who have really been abandoned by Stalker. You say Stalker has taken care of you licensing-wise, but I have the opposite experience. While I think it's within their right to bundle groupware, SIP, etc with CGP and charge whatever they want for it, I don't want the updated product. All I want is additional user licenses for the product I already own. There was always a path for providers to increase the number of accounts/user by purchasing additional licenses for those accounts/users. Now there is no such path. In order to get additional accounts/users for the current version I am using (4.2 or 4.3) I have to purchase "the new licensing scheme" (Stalker's sales person's words, not mine). As an example to add just 100 more users (200 current) to my system I have to pay more than I've already paid for the first 200.
>
> ~joe
>
Well, we originally bought the "Unlimited" license for $4,999 way back
when CGPro was first introduced (when there actually _was_ an Unlimited
license :)). We also bought a 30K user license for another company, and
have recommended CGP to a number of our customers who also bought
various sized licenses.
When all the licensing changes occured, we got with Stalker sales and
were able to pay a reasonable amount to bring our licenses to a
"current" status.
So, we are still in the "happy camper" category as far as Stalker customers.
--
-----------------------------------------
Mike Bacher / list...@tulsaconnect.com
TCIS - TulsaConnect Internet Services
http://www.tulsaconnect.com
-----------------------------------------
#############################################################
Mike Bacher
John Keown wrote:
> I do think this is all falling on deaf ears. It seems stalker has made the
> decision that they want to concentrate their business to the enterprise full
> function sip voip and etc. They are concentrating on a single product and
> market type. It may be a good decision for them in terms of both revenue and
> support. All of us that are complaining went for stalker as a full function
> advance mail server and that is all we want for the near future.
>
> I though it would have been better for them to split the product into to two
> products. 1) the traditional full function mail server, with partial mapi
> support as they did originally. 2) a full service communications server as
> they are now doing. However not knowing their cost structure and their
> revenue split may not be worth it for them to do both products.
>
> IMHO I believe there is a great deal of revenue to still be obtain from a
> full function mail server. However it is stalker choice to convert to a high
> end full function communications server and to let the plain full function
> mail server eventually fade to some other vendor.
I do believe it is a smart move for Stalker to invest in new
communications methods, but IMHO the core "mail server"
functionality/enhancements have suffered as a result. I'm glad they
decided to go with David's WebMail skins, which made a quantum leap in
the usability of the WebMail interface, but I think more work in this
area is also warranted.
--
-----------------------------------------
Mike Bacher / list...@tulsaconnect.com
TCIS - TulsaConnect Internet Services
http://www.tulsaconnect.com
-----------------------------------------
#############################################################
chuck goolsbee
>>full function mail server. However it is stalker choice to convert to a high
>>end full function communications server and to let the plain full function
>>mail server eventually fade to some other vendor.
>
>I do believe it is a smart move for Stalker to invest in new
>communications methods, but IMHO the core "mail server"
>functionality/enhancements have suffered as a result.
Vlad may delete this posting at will, as it may offend the culturally
over-sensitive.
A college professor of mine (of Scot descent of course) once told me
that "You always want to work for people with more money than you."
Careful study of that great Scottish philosopher Adam Smith will also
show that this is a fundamental aspect of modern economic theory.
The "Enterprise Market" almost always has money to spend, the ISP
market, at the moment, does not. Stalker is not going to see huge
revenue growth by solely catering to today's ISP market. I would
venture a guess that some good percentage of their customers of 2001
no longer even exist. I know for a fact that several of them don't
because my company has acquired them. =)
Me, being a shrewd man of Scottish origin as well, squeeze every
penny I have and I attribute the survival of my company to that
habit. I have a keen sense for when to save and when to spend as I
pilot my craft through the rough and ever-changing seas of the
Capitol Market. The past four years have been saving ones, not
spending ones.
I imagine that despite glowing reviews and (for the most part...
perhaps for everyone's part save me) CGP has performed above and
beyond the expectations of everyone... revenues did not quite live up
to expectations, hence the change in market focus to the "Enterprise"
and a hefty increase in price. It was a shrewd move to look at the
competition and match their pricing, especially when your product
out-performs them. "Messaging platforms" in the enterprise world are
a boutique product with huge revenue potential. SMTP/POP/IMAP/webmail
are commodity products in the ISP space and CGP's competition are
mostly OSS/freeware. Stalker is a small company that does not have
the resources to adequately service one market while actively
pursuing another.
The thing that strikes me as odd - and as a serious mistake, is the
almost active and seemingly hostile fashion by which those of us in
the ISP market are being abandoned. I suspect, like so many other
customers, that we could have been essentially left lying here,
running our servers and being left alone. Not ignored, but lets say
"unmolested." We would not have en masse started pumping capital into
Stalker in the form of upgrades and maintenance fees (though I
suspect some percentage of us would have.) Nor would we have even
considered alternative mail software. The only way to get more
revenue from us would be to fix some long-standing issues in version
4, such as the mailing list and web UI annoyances. Otherwise we would
remain happy as clams, content in our use of the existing product
while Stalker created the version 5 "Enterprise Messaging Platform"
or whatever the buzzwords the trade rags wish to bestow upon it.
Instead we are being presented with drama akin to a divorce. All the
relatives up in arms, feeling forced into "taking sides", the wife
and kids (ISPs) feeling abandoned and making faces at the new "trophy
girlfriend" (Enterprise), all the while complaining about how it used
to be and what scraps are being left to us to continue with our
lives. Timebombing your software has got to bee the most boneheaded
and potentially suicidal maneuver yet executed by a vendor. It added
injury to insult and has stirred up controversy where it was not at
all required. It is angering, frustrating, and causing the loss of
current customers, while I can only imagining planting a seed of
doubt in the minds of the future customers in this lucrative new
market (if they are at all paying attention and performing due
diligence like they should.)
Only a fool would deploy a core business service software that could
(and HAS) shut itself down on an arbitrary date. Past performance is
an indicator of future possibility. It can be denied that it will
ever happen again, but having seen it happen now more than once, why
should anyone believe the promise? It can be explained away with
twisted logic, but proof is in the pudding, not to mention the system
logs.
Speaking of twisted logic, that is something raised to a high art
form in Russian culture. A brief study of Russian literature or
history will reveal vast sums of twisted logic. From Dostoevsky to
Stalin, lies becoming truth, while all retaining impeccable logic.
From the monumental to the trivial, it is a pervasive part of the
culture. Here is a trivial example related to me by a client:
"A friend had a visa in Russia a few years ago that said he could
stay in "all" cities. In Vladivostok, the hotel said that "all"
didn't mention Vladivostok. My friend went to the police station,
they were very amused, and wrote an insulting note to the manager
explaining the meaning of "all." The manager also thought it was very
amusing, let him stay at the hotel, and kept the note."
For the monumental read some history, for more trivial twisted logic,
read the threads on this list. Obviously it may be some time, if
ever, that a Russian can fully grasp how Capitalism works. ;)
--chuck
--
____________________________________________________________
Were there mistakes? Yes. Only those who don't act don't make
mistakes. But to organize well --- *that* is a difficult task.
-- Lenin, April 24, 1917
John Keown
server.
----- Original Message -----
From: "chuck goolsbee" <chuc...@forest.net>
To: "CommuniGate Pro Discussions" <CGat...@mail.stalker.com>
John C. Welch
The problem with this is that the Enterprise market has as much, if not more
inertia than the ISP market when it comes to commodity services like email
and messaging. We don't like to change either unless we have to, or there's
an outstandingly better choice.
Por ejempelo...the company that actually pays me is an Exchange shop.
We're this for a number of reasons...
We're mostly windows shop, although not as much as we used to be.
We're small, ~600 employees, so our messaging needs are really quite modest.
We have a number of enterprise agreements with Microsoft.
We have critical users who live with handhelds, (treos/pdas)
We have a number of critical users not on Windows who still need groupware.
Every time I look for Exchange alternatives, there really aren't any
compelling enough to change. It would take a RADICALLY cheaper product, or
one that had a really compelling feature set. None of the VOIP stuff in
CGPro will ever be used here. Our telephony people are sucking the Cisco
teat far too much for that. In any event, VOIP does nothing for us that we
need, and if I need messaging, I use Jabber.
CGPro has nothing to offer us for cross-platform groupware. Nothing. iCal is
a joke in the enterprise, it supports none of the delegation/public folder
options we need and live on. The MAPI connector is a poor stepchild of a
feature we already have in Exchange. CGPro's handheld support is
non-existant, and the one partner they talk about has a product that is just
ridiculously complex to set up and administrate, especially compared to
things like GoodLink. (No, raising spectres of "teh evul lack of security"
due to GoodLink being a hosted service scares no one with a clue. If it did,
Chuck would be out of a company, as would every other ISP on the planet.
Obviously, critical service hosting is not some kind of bad thing. The fact
that a Notify rep even tried to raise that issue shows me a certain attitude
towards potential customers and business practices that causes me to reject
them as a possible solution.)
So what does CGPro offer the SMB market that is better enough than what they
have to change? Nothing. They've no cross-platform groupware solution,
Exchange does. They've no solution that's cheaper enough. They've no
compelling handheld support. Unless a company has nothing to start with,
CGPro doesn't have anything to offer them.
If you have huge numbers of users, and they're all Windows users, and they
don't have any handhelds, then maybe CGPro is a better solution, but the
lack of communication from the company over even simple things...mailing
lists, Mac groupware, and the insistence that there's nothing wrong with
support recommending versions that a quick record search would show as being
a timebomb risk makes CGPro quite frankly, far too risky for a larger
enterprise. If you cannot trust the recommendations of CG support people to
NOT put you at risk of your system time-bombing, then why buy the product.
Quite frankly, if I had a timebombed server, and documentation showing that
CG Pro support had recommended upgrading to the version that bombed, even
after being asked if it was okay under my license, (which a few people do),
I'd take three actions...i'd forward the docs to the lawyers and say "Get me
some money back for this b.s.", I'd email a few well-known enterprise
columnists about this, and I'd have another system onsite and running within
the week. Technical excellence is only one part of the deal, and it's often
not the critical one. Being able to trust my vendor to not screw me over for
a faster license upgrade is a major part.
The customer is NOT always right, but they ARE always the customer, and for
Vlad to talk about trust when it's blatantly obvious that there is NO trust
coming from his end, borders on the hypocritical. Anyone considering CGPro
for a critical enterprise system that did any due diligence on the company
behind it would send the sales reps packing. If you want your customers to
trust you, you have to show some back.
--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwe...@bynkii.com
#############################################################
Matt Ghali
And yet, as you may note, you don't often see these customers
posting support questions here, hmmm makes you wonder...these
"real users" don't ever need support?
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers.htm
http://www.stalker.com/content/customers_full.html#isp
http://www.stalker.com/content/CABmembers.html
FYI, listing UC Santa Cruz on that list is a violation of the UC
trademark policy. Whoever authorized your use of the UC name is
actually in danger of criminal prosecution:
http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/trademarks/ucname_bg.html
And Stalker is exposed to prosecution for trademark infringement.
Are you sure that name is supposed to be on that web page?
matto
--m...@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin><
The only thing necessary for the triumph
of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Robert Gormley
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CommuniGate Pro Discussions
> [mailto:CGat...@mail.stalker.com] On Behalf Of Matt Ghali
> Sent: Saturday, 5 November 2005 6:56 PM
> To: CommuniGate Pro Discussions
> Subject: Re: Customer Advisory Board
>
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Thom O'Connor wrote:
>
> And yet, as you may note, you don't often see these customers
> posting support questions here, hmmm makes you wonder...these
> "real users" don't ever need support?
>
> http://www.stalker.com/content/customers.htm
> http://www.stalker.com/content/customers_full.html#isp
> http://www.stalker.com/content/CABmembers.html
>
>
> FYI, listing UC Santa Cruz on that list is a violation of the
> UC trademark policy. Whoever authorized your use of the UC
> name is actually in danger of criminal prosecution:
> http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/trademarks/uc
> name_bg.html
>
> And Stalker is exposed to prosecution for trademark infringement.
> Are you sure that name is supposed to be on that web page?
I'm amazed that the name being 'a property of the state' allows the
state to suppress and forbid factual statements. "UC has purchased
CommuniGate Pro" - is a factual statement, not implying 'connection' or
'affiliation'. I'm not 'connected' with Starbucks because I'm a customer
of theirs. And then there's Free Speech questionability there, too.
I was more amused by this statement:
"Stalker Software, Inc. has numerous colleges and universities
worldwide."
Robert
Vladimir A. Butenko
C'mon. Do you REALLY think that the referenced UC pages say that? :-)
===
b. Nothing in this section shall interfere with or restrict the right of any
person to make a true and accurate statement of his or her present or former
relationship or connection with, his or her employment by, or his or her
enrollment in, the University of California in the course of stating his or
her experience or qualifications for any academic, governmental, business,
or professional credit or enrollment, or in connection with any academic,
governmental, professional, or other employment whatsoever.
===
The real purpose of those Legal Notes is to avoid situations when someone
opens a company called "UC Santa Cruz Software Consulting", or sells a
product named "UC Santa Cruz Diploma".
If some people do not want to read the very papers they bet their business
or reputation on (be it a License Agreement, or a Very Dangerous Legal
Notice), they are destined to meet certain complications in their lives...
I'd totally dismiss the possibility that the said papers were read, but
their content was misrepresented intentionally.
> Robert
Sincerely,
Vladimir
Matt Ghali
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
The real purpose of those Legal Notes is to avoid situations when
someone opens a company called "UC Santa Cruz Software
Consulting", or sells a product named "UC Santa Cruz Diploma".
I can tell you from personal experience that your assumption of
limited scope is incorrect. UC has in the past considered the mere
use of the text "UC Berkeley" in an email as a trademark
infringement.
I am sure that they would consider the representation of their name
as a possible product endorsement a much more serious case.
If some people do not want to read the very papers they bet their
business or reputation on (be it a License Agreement, or a Very
Dangerous Legal Notice), they are destined to meet certain
complications in their lives...
I'd totally dismiss the possibility that the said papers were
read, but their content was misrepresented intentionally.
I don't know what this means, and I hope you are not suggesting I am
misrepresenting any information. I simply pointed you to the UCOP
page where their policy is clearly stated.
Hope it all works out for you,
matto
--m...@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin><
The only thing necessary for the triumph
of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
#############################################################
Vladimir A. Butenko
Matt Ghali <ma...@snark.net> wrote:
> Vlad:
>
> On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
>
> The real purpose of those Legal Notes is to avoid situations when
> someone opens a company called "UC Santa Cruz Software
> Consulting", or sells a product named "UC Santa Cruz Diploma".
>
> I can tell you from personal experience that your assumption of
> limited scope is incorrect. UC has in the past considered the mere
> use of the text "UC Berkeley" in an email as a trademark
> infringement.
They have all rights to do this, if you are their employee, and send someone
a message offering, let's say assistance in joining that university, or help
in passing exams, etc. If your letter is signed "Matt Ghali, UC of X", then
that UC of X has all rights to think that you've abused that name, or
misrepresented them: i.e. that would create an incorrect and misleading
association.
And in order to stop these things from happening UC of X can require that
all its *employees* refrain from using the UC of X names in their E-mail
*signatures*.
If we would say "CommuniGate Pro, designed in UC of X" - then it would be
definitely a case of concern (and it would be a lie, too). If we would say
"CommuniGate Pro used in UC of X, instead of xxxx, designed in UC of X" -
there is nothing that can be said against it, and it's also true.
> I am sure that they would consider the representation of their name
> as a possible product endorsement a much more serious case.
You may want to consult your lawyer. Or just carefully read the paper you've
brought up yourself. *I* do not make assumptions - I simply read the
materials you've presented.
> Hope it all works out for you,
> matto
Sincerely,
Vladimir
Shaun Gamble
> On Nov 3, 2005, at 2:57 PM, Thom O'Connor wrote:
>
>> To put this clearly - if you have a Support issue and are under a
>> Support contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not
>> the mailing list.
>
> urgent.
>
Oh, I don't know, maybe the fact that CGP's user base is not totally
within the US making phone calls to support not an easy option to take.
Especially considering the time zone differences and the cost. I have
spoken to Stalker Support, they kindly called me during my business
hours to help me work out the licensing issue when they first announced
this was happening. They were extremely helpful and accommodating to my
needs. However, as I live in Australia, I consider this list my only
practical source of support, other than emailing support.
--
Shaun
Managing Director
Darkelf Software Solutions Pty Ltd
<http://www.darwinaccommodation.com.au>
<mailto:spam...@darkelf.com.au>
Matt Ghali
Here's a direct quote from the UCOP page at:
http://www.ucop.edu/ucophome/coordrev/ucpolicies/trademarks/ucname_bg.html
III. The University Name and Other University Trademarks
The title "University of California" is protected by California
Education Code 92000, which states that:
1. The name "University of California" is the property of the
state. No person shall, without the permission of the Regents of the
University of California, use this name, or any abbreviation of it
or any name of which these words are a part, in any of the following
ways:
1. To designate any business, social, political, religious,
or other organization, including, but not limited to, any
corporation, firm, partnership, association, group, activity, or
enterprise.
2. To imply, indicate or otherwise suggest that any such
organization, or any product or service of such organization is
connected or affiliated with, or is endorsed, favored, or supported
by, or is opposed by the University of California.
[ ... ]
Every person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a
misdemeanor.
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
They have all rights to do this, if you are their employee, and
send someone a message offering, let's say assistance in joining
that university, or help in passing exams, etc. If your letter is
signed "Matt Ghali, UC of X", then that UC of X has all rights to
think that you've abused that name, or misrepresented them: i.e.
that would create an incorrect and misleading association. And in
order to stop these things from happening UC of X can require that
all its *employees* refrain from using the UC of X names in their
E-mail *signatures*.
If we would say "CommuniGate Pro, designed in UC of X" - then it
would be definitely a case of concern (and it would be a lie,
too). If we would say "CommuniGate Pro used in UC of X, instead of
xxxx, designed in UC of X" - there is nothing that can be said
against it, and it's also true.
> I am sure that they would consider the representation of their name as a
> possible product endorsement a much more serious case.
You may want to consult your lawyer. Or just carefully read the
paper you've brought up yourself. *I* do not make assumptions - I
simply read the materials you've presented.
--m...@snark.net------------------------------------------<darwin><
The only thing necessary for the triumph
of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
#############################################################
Peter Back
Duane Hill
On Monday, November 7, 2005 at 7:28:49 AM, pe...@halflight.co.uk confabulated:
> Bored with this thread, I vote it be banished to the bog of eternal stench.
Hmm... I'm guessing you've seen Labyrinth before?
> Matt Ghali wrote:
--
"This message is made of 100% recycled electrons."
Adam Dennis
>Bored with this thread, I vote it be banished to the bog of eternal stench.
Seconded.
Stefan Seiz
> Seconded.
Thirded. last time i checked, this wasn't a Trademark-Law List.
--
Stefan Seiz <http://www.StefanSeiz.com>
Spamto: <b...@imd.net>
Mark J Strawcutter
>> Support contract, you are best-off contacting Support directly, not
>> the mailing list.
>
> Why doesn't anyone get this? E-mail is a terrible medium for anything
> urgent.
My experience says just the opposite. With one piece of software we
ran, I rarely contacted vendor tech support other than by email - they
monitored it as closely (if not moreso) as the phone.
I even had one instance where I reported a problem, received a work-arount
and then a patch all within a 2-hour period late on a Sunday evening.
Mark
Mark J Strawcutter
A while back we were approached about participating on the CAB.
However, the inquiry made it quite clear that they were only interested
in members from "upper management".
I found this disturbing, and it gave me the opinion that all they wanted
was a "trophy CAB" that could be used as part of marketing efforts
("look at all these VPs we have on our CAB").
JORGE RUBEN MACIAS LOPEZ
El Sun, 6 Nov 2005 21:54:44 -0800 (PST)
, Matt Ghali <ma...@snark.net> escribió: