|
Evan, At 11/10/01 09:14 AM +1300, you wrote: >CFINT is merely IBM's way of saying "if you choose to do things in the >traditional old-fashioned way, I'm gonna reap the maximum benefit". I think that that's a "dirty trick"! How would you feel if, when you decided to add another module to your primary software package (remember that you are paying for the new software), the vendor said that you now had to pay a new premium for your existing software!!! This is how /400 customers view the tax. >Whether we agree with this or not, we do have the option of re-engineering >our architecture - it's a question of whether we choose to invest in R&D >for our applications (and thereby get out from under the so called "tax" >or shell out for hardware and stay stuck with it. The legal, moral, business arguments can go on forever, but the bottom line for future sales is perception. If the customer base feels cheated in any way, then sales will suffer. -mark
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.