[ale] WordPerfect for Linux

[Michael H. Warfield]

All...

On August 28, 1997 orders at sdcorp.com enscribed thusly...
> Spire's purchase page for CWPLinux at
> http://www.spire.com/products/enduser/wp/wp_linux.htm  is now up and fully
> functional.   Have a look and let me know what you think.

	Ok...  I checked out their page when I got your message a couple
of days ago and yes it's now up and I've had a look...

	Now...  You asked what I think...

	After going over the ordering and licensing information, I've taken
a couple of days to gather my thoughts.  I'm sending a copy of this message
to Corel and to various Linux mailing lists where I believe the information
will be of some considerable interest.

	When I first heard that there was going to be a native WordPerfect
port to Linux, I thought "Wonderful!  Where do I sign up!".  I've been using
Applixware but I have used WordPerfect under DOS and Windows for years.  I
have licensed copies of WordPerfect 5.0, 5.1, 6.0, 6.0 Windows, 6.0a Windows,
6.1 Windows, and 7.0 Windows 95.  WordPerfect would be the piece de resistance
to roll over the Windows weenies who see that my systems running Linux are
faster and more reliable that their Windows boxes but they want an Office
suite they recognize.  They even see that, with Applix, I have more
compatibility with their Windows Word documents than they have just between
the different versions of Word.  On one occasion our Windows NT expert had
been having trouble getting MS Word to run on Windows NT 4.0 when it first
came out.  The joke around the office for a while was that I could read
Word documents better than the NT crowd!

	So, I signed up for the beta program and downloaded the beta version
for Linux some time ago.  The eval period ran out on me a couple of times and
I kept looking for a way to BUY THIS SUCKER!  It had its problems.  Applix
does a better job of converting some Word documents than does WordPerfect,
but I really liked having WordPerfect on my Linux desktop.  This was snazey!

	I even called the SDCorp WordPerfect for Linux number and left
messages.  I never heard back.  This had the potential, for me, of converting
even more Windows users over to Linux.  I develop a major security product
that runs on numerous UNIX platforms as well as Windows NT.  Since our
sales and marketing people often need to give demos (and the product
can NOT run on Windows 95 - its a security product) this would have
helped them work on the same platform they demo on.  I was fired up and
rear'n to go.

	Finally, the word came out on the ALE list (Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
mailing list) about being able to license any day now.  I hit your site and
found that, indeed, it was no longer listed as beta.  The prices looked
acceptable as well (I can get the complete Appixware office suite for the
same price as your word processor but you're within the ball park).  When I
looked to order, I found the two links to your distributers, one of which,
Spire, was non-operational and one of which linked to UniDirect who had no
information on Linux what-so-ever.  I got back to you at that point and you
replied to check the first site, Spire, again.  I did and yes the site is now
operational.  The UniDirect site also now has a link back to your order page,
so I guess they are both now up.  I went over the information very
carefully...  VERY SLOWLY AND VERY CAREFULLY!

	Over the last 48 hours things have now turned 180 degrees.  I now
sit here in total disappointment and disgust.  While your prices are certainly
within range and could be competative with what I have to deal with around
Microsoft and Applix products, the licensing is totally unacceptable both
from a personal and profesional standpoint.  I have now removed all copies
of WordPerfect from my systems and have canceled my projects for promoting
WordPerfect in our corporation.

	Now I will detail out my objections to this licensing scheme.

	I have several computers.  I have two laptops along with numerous
servers and desktops at home.  I also have my personal workstation at my
office.  I use software on each of these systems.  I'm only one person and
only one copy is ever running.  If I have MS Windows loaded on these systems,
I can use one copy of WordPerfect, or Word, or Corel Draw, etc, etc, etc... on
my laptop and on my desktop.  I don't need to buy a copy for each and every
system I personally use.  I expect the same level of portability, capability,
and flexibility on the same hardware with Linux as I would get with Windows!
I do get that with Applixware.

	What's worse is that this asinine license scheme of yours is linked
to the hostid!  What were you people thinking?!?!?!  That information is
normally derived from the network information.  My laptop may get reinstalled
from time to time (I am a developer) and may have different ethernet cards,
IP address, and Hostnames.  It has a different system name and configuration
depending on which network I have it plugged into and often I use it
standalone.  Now, granted, the hostid can be preserved and set to any value
I want.  Well, that's then just a pain in the butt for me and provides
you with not one lick of security for your licensing if I can set it and
change it to my chosing anyways.

	If the license blows up because I changed my IP address, then I am
really screwed until I get a replacement from you.  We just renumbered our
entire office last year when we changed ISP's and went from one class C to
8 class C's.  I have personal control over a Class B (130.205) and we have
talked at the office about using that if our network needs continue to expand.
We can't be saddled with relicensing the known universe when our addressing
or topology changes!

	My workstations at home have had ethernet cards replaced several times
in the last year (topology upgrades and lightening in one case).  I've also
reinstalled the systems from the ground up a couple of times as my cluster
of networked systems has grown.  At one time, my primary workstation at home
was a system named "WittsEnd" which was also my uucp and news system.  It
was easier to move my X-Windows work to another system (Alcove) than it was
to move the news engine.  So now I work on Alcove (this is all at home on
my personal wittsend.com domain).  Alcove is also my web server
<http://www.wittsend.com> and secure web server <https://www.wittsend.com>.
That too has moved between systems as my needs have changed and I've move
to newer and bigger hardware.  Next time I move, will I move the webservers
or will I move which system I run X Windows on?

	Your licensing system would end up directly impacting my ability to
configure and rearange my network at home.  This is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!

	The details of why this license scheme is so stupid is really not
relavent in any case.  The real issue is that we are trying to compete in and
against the Windows paradym where this bullshit doesn't exist!  I just
can't promote a project where I go into a managers office and tell him,
"well... yes it's a little more expensive", and "well... yes it doesn't do
everything that MS Office does", and on top of that "well... there is also
this draconian licensing scheme we have to deal with".  I seriously
doubt he would even do me the curtesey of laughing in my face.

	We have a sales force who may run their lap tops standalone, or may
connect directly to one of our subnets, or may dial into their favorite ISP,
or may dial directly into our corporate dial-up network.  Each would have
different (or possibly multiple - ever hear of DHCP) IP addresses.  How
would your license scheme even HOPE to keep up with such a variable
environment?  Doesn't matter, really.  The scheme was unacceptable ON ITS
FACE so it doesn't matter how, why, or even if it would work.  It died of
its own merit (or lack there of) not of any silly implimentation details.

	Let's look at the opportunity that's been seriously lost here.
I have dozens of engineers reporting to me.  Over a hundred other employees
in my office look to me for technical leadership and recommendations.  Half
of my engineers use Windows NT and the rest use Linux (The engineers would
not use Windows 95 even at GUN POINT).  The Windows people are using MS Office.
We have some installed base of Applix for Linux.  Of course we have the
normal heterogenous environment problems of converting back and forth between
each others formats.  I doubt Word will be found on Linux outside of the
emulators anytime soon.  Applixware on Windows 95 and Windows NT is not
an option.  Here was an opportunity for me to move a high profile package
in on Linux with prominent name recognition on Windows that would have met
with little resistance in either camp.  If both camps could have used the
same package, that package suddenly becomes very VERY attractive company wide.
We are getting ready to drop over $35,000 just in upgrades to Microsoft
office products alone.

	We will not even go NEAR a package with that licensing scheme like
this if there is any alternative.  We would rather buy a appropriate number
of individual packages than get involved in some hair brained licensing
scheme.  These things are known to be a continual pain in the fanny.  We
have some developer packages on some UNIX platforms (UIMX on SunOS) where it
is unavoidable.  Those packages have taught us well that, if there is an
alternative, a license scheme like this is an automatic disqualifier!

	My network administrator has a spredsheet of packages and users and
number of licenses we need for everything.  HE is our license manager and
we don't need or want something more that's unnecessary and is just going to
cause us additional administrative grief and gum up the works.  It's been my
experience that these things tend to fail, as well, just when you are
depending on them most.  Most of us view them as sources of unpredictablity
and unreliablity.  They don't add anything to the product beyond adding
complexity and unreliablity, so why go with a product with a license
system like this when there are viable products out there without one.

	It has been partially from antiquated draconian licensing systems
like this that have slowed the acceptance of UNIX on the desktop for years!
WHY would ANYONE put up with this kind of silly nonsense when they have,
what is to them, a perfectly acceptable, affordable, alternative (Windows)
where they don't have to put up with this crap!

	As Linus Torvalds said in his keynote address at the Atlanta Linux
Showcase, we know that the key to UNIX on the desktop is applications.
Applications that are easy to install and easy to use.  The enhanced
performance and reliablity of Linux is then just icing on the cake.
Licensing schemes like this just sour the dough!

	Licensing schemes like these have no place in this environment.

	As I said, I'm a developer and the company I work for delivers
a product on 7 (soon 9) different UNIX platforms.  Yes, it is licensed.
But that license allows the customer to download and use the platform
binary of his choice (even UNIX vs Windows with the same license key) or
even change back and forth.  He can install it on the system of his choice
or move it to another if he wishes.  It is licensed by application capability
not by application location.

	So here we are.  In the space of 48 hours, I've gone from actively
pursuing and promoting the idea of WordPerfect on our Linux systems at
the office and using that to promote purchase of WordPerfect for our Windows
systems for a common uniform application to now canceling all of these
projects, removing all of the copies of WordPerfect I have installed
anywhere (Linux and Windows) and going back to Applixware and MS Word.

	We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto!!!  The old UNIX mode of thinking,
that has effectively torpedoed many of the advances that UNIX might have
made, will not longer cut it.  If you are going to be competative in an
arena that is staturated already with the Windows mentality, then you are
going to have to compete toe to toe on their ground or you have conceded
defeat from the start.  This licensing scheme is a non-starter in that world.

	Your product features, quality, and reliability don't mean jack when
you bundle it up with a license scheme which disqualifies you before any
consideration what so ever.  My projects are now still born and I've wasted
a lot of time trying and testing and looking into this product.  I won't
make the same mistake again.

	That's what I think....

> Stephanie Louw
> orders at sdcorp.com
> (801) 342-7532

> ----------
> From: Michael H. Warfield <mhw at alcove.wittsend.com>
> To: CWPLINUX Orders <orders at sdcorp.com>
> Subject: Re: WordPerfect Demo
> Date: Thursday, August 28, 1997 9:21 AM
> 
> Hello,
> 
> > Michael H. Warfield
> > 
> > For WordPerfect for UNIX purchasing information please see
> > http://www.sdcorp.com/sellers.htm
> > 
> > For WordPerfect for Linux purchasing information please see
> > http://www.sdcorp.com.  This product will be available for sale as of 
> > Wednesday, August 27.
> 
> 	As a matter of fact, I did check this out yesterday.  Under the URL
> http://www.sdcorp.com/wplinux/orderlinux.html, I was directed to contact
> one of two resellers.  Spire Technology does not have their web page
> operational yet and UniDirect does not list the Linux version anywhere.
> I'm going to phone Spire today.

	Regards,
	Mike
--
 Michael H. Warfield    |  (770) 985-6132   |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
  (The Mad Wizard)      |  (770) 925-8248   |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
  NIC whois:  MHW9      |  An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471    |  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!