HP3000-L Archives

September 1996, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"SIMPKINS, Terry" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SIMPKINS, Terry
Date:
Fri, 27 Sep 1996 17:22:00 BST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
 Art Bahrs wrote:
>
> Well,
>     I have seen the lastest posts that state WRQ's Reflection is available
in
> site Lic.'s ... and this is true :)  as I have one :)
>
>     My interest is this... I saw a price quoted for Minisoft's package and
> several VAR's (very politely!) pointed out they can sell us Reflection for
> similar pricing...But nobody quoted prices for Reflection????
>
>      Please, I am wondering what Reflection costs and do both packages
give
> the
> same features??  ie TCP/IP stacks, etc.
>

I suspect we have a discrepancy in terms here.  My interpretation of "site
license" is that the number of machines using the software doesn't matter.
 Any machine at the site/in the company (depends on wording) is licensed to
use the software for a single, set, all inclusive price.  Everything I have
seen on this thread so far talks about a "25 user site license".  This to me
is an oxymoron.  The terms are contradictory.  It don't compute.  It don't
make no sense.

When Minisoft sells a site license, it is just that.  a single payment made
to them which allows the buyer to run the product on as many machines as
they wish, period.  I have repeatedly been told that WRQ doesn't (and won't)
offer that type of license.  Have they now changed?

Remember, that Minisoft also includes the TCP-IP stack as a part of the
vanilla product, not as an extra cost option as does WRQ.

I have no interest in Minisoft other than being a very happy customer.  I
was a very happy customer of WRQ (owned PC-2622 serial number 120) for many
years, until the price forced me elsewhere.  I am just concerned that there
is some misunderstanding in the terms being used in the discussion.

Terry Simpkins

ATOM RSS1 RSS2