»

[bhoggett]

@f94sbu

I find it pretty amusing that you seem to think that the computer industry works totally different from the rest of the commercial industry.

First thing, support is always the responsibility of the person/company/entity that sold you a product and since MS never has sold me a product directly, it is never their responsibility to support me. Support is supposed to go through the retailer. Why else would they be allowed to add 30% on the price of a product?

For getting the product into the hands of the user? To cover the costs of the administration involved in the retail operation, plus a profit margin for the retailer?

If you honestly think every retailer is responsible for giving first line technical support on every software product they sell you're totally mad. The costs involved would be astronomoical.

There is another issue you're all ignoring. First line support includes not only call vetting but problem ownership. Handling this is both time consuming and takes considerable manpower. Don't you realise how much companies that provide this service for the corporate sector charge their customers, and for limited periods? For the retail sector to do the same it would add at least $200 or so for every single software item sold, no matter what the original cost. Operating systems, because of their complexity, would be specialy prohibitive.

I honestly think most of you haven't got a clue as to what's involved in "first line support" for a product like this.

Second, if you think that you can go and ask for a refund of the licence price, try to figure out what the licence cost really is. Cost is never a fixed number, it varies quite abit depending on volume. So, you will never be able to determine the cost of the non OEM part in that case.

Like I said, the legal precedent already exists.

Regarding the superbundle, you said that Genesi owns the software. What???? Doesn't the superbundle contain lots of different software licenced from lots of different developers. Please correct me if I am wrong, but your logic doesn't work here imho.

Genesi supply the software. They are the publisher of the bundle. (If I said they owned the individual software copyrights then I apologise for being misleading, but I don't think I did). Therefore it is impossible to prove that they charge their customers for the bundle. In other words the theory would be that Genesi absorb any license costs and supply it to the user for free.

This is not the case with OEM's whose contracts with the software suppliers spells out that the vendors charge for it, specially when, as you say, the fee is closely tied to volume.

Look, let's let it go and agree to disagree. You're not going to convince me without far better researched arguments than you've come up with so far, and I keep having to repeat myself in replying to you. The thread is clearly going nowhere and should be put to rest now we've all had our say.

[Madgun68]

Honestly, I don't know if things are just different in other countries (than the US) but the idea of a retailer providing technical support in most cases is absurd. Considering a retail chain can sell thousands of products, there's simply no way that can provide support for all those products. The only kind of support you should expect is a refund (where applicable) or exchanges. Anything else should go to the company that makes the product.

Even Microsoft supports their own products. (Before Microsoft pulled their contract, I used to work with a company that was contracted with Microsoft for their products.) If they expected retailers to support their products, they wouldn't bother providing support at all.

As far as markup, you're forgetting that the distributers get their chunk of the pie too.. The retailers aren't the only ones that add to the cost of the product on the consumer end.

[DaveP]

I think there is some confusion about OEM on here.

AmigaOS4 ( with the exception of Cyber/Blizzard versions ) is only
sold as OEM.

The industry practise is that the manufacturer bundles something together
with the product that is being OEM licensed and sells it under a brand.

Normally this means that the OEM licensee handles level one support
for the entire bundle ( in this case AOS4 and a PPC board ), level two
and level three support mechanisms are generally handled by the individual
component owners of the bundle.

So, L2 and L3 queries that were Teron related would go to Mai.

L2 and L3 queries that were OS4 related would go to Hyperion.

L2 and L3 queries that were driver related would go to the providers
of the drivers.

So, to recap,

The OEM license provides for bundling, and some level of responsibility
on the part of the licensee for marketing, support and costs.

The OEM licensee is actually the reseller - who has agreed to take on
the task of bundling and L1 support.

Of course in practise customers can still go direct but if it is a bundling
issue they are likely to be rebuffed to the OEM provider.

So all these comments about "hardware manufacturers" taking responsibilities
where they should not be is moot. It is the vendor/reseller/bundler or rather
the OEM licensee that takes ownership of L1 support for the entire
bundle.

So it seems to me that where people get hung up is when they fail
to differentiate between the entity that is the OEM bundler and the
entities that contribute to the bundle under OEM license. This is most
evident when someone that manufactures one component of the bundle
is also an OEM licensee for a bundle that includes one component.

So, in the case of Genesi, consider the hardware manufacturer to be
BPlan, the software provider to be Hyperion and the bundle to be a
combination of BPlan and Hyperion developed products sold under an
OEM license that allows combination of both where Genesi is the
OEM licensee for both components.

Those that issue the OEM license are well within their rights to
stipulate terms and conditions for the license. If the potential licensee
does not like the terms and conditions - then they don't have to become
an OEM licensee.

This is at least the way it works for IBM OEM agreements in both
directions.

[DaveP]

I also just read Bills point about costs being astronomical. That is why
sometimes ( in fact more frequently here ) the support side
is "outsourced" back to the component provider for L1 support
( these things are always handled in the contracts ) at a fee. What
sometimes happens then ( and I know, I work next to a department that
does this ) is that a customised exchange number is set up on a
customer support line such that when a customer dials into that number
the call is flagged as say.... oh..... Fidelity Systems Support and
it is handled by the L1 support staff who answer the call with
"Welcome to Fidelity Systems Support", if another line number gets
used it is flagged as X then Y then Z.

The practicalities are seperable from the actual license you know and often
published OEM terms are merely a starting point for bargaining.

[DaveP]

Oh and another thing, I called MicroSoft support for help with the
OEM version of WindowsXP that came with a packard bell I bought
for Julie and they said "Do you have a support ticket from Packard Bell?"

I said no.

They said "Ring Packard Bell on this number, or contact the shop where
you bought the equipment"

PC World in the UK hires a plethora of staff to help with L1 support
queries, Packard Bell provides L1 support for their Windows/PC OEM bundles
( which I went through and eventually found it was actually a packard
bell specific patch that was needed ).

So don't say it doesn't happen.

It might not be "fair" but it does happen.

[Crumb]

@bhogget:

this situation is different because:
a)OS4 is not sold apart for AmigaOnes

b)If you don't want OS4 you can buy a LinuxOne

c)no one asks Apple a refund of OS X because you are going to run linux on your G5...

d)you don't buy a car and ask a refund for the radio if you aren't going to use it.

e) It's stupid to buy an AmigaOne if you don't plan going to use AmigaOS so the only reason you may want that is to PIRATE OS4.