Have anybody received a Remote Access Authorization form from SSA as part of a procedure standardize across various support centers?

Trying to get some feedback before agreeing to it, since it does not hold them responsible for any data lost/and business interruption if normal/standard procedure is not follow up when troubleshooting problem

Any feedback will be appreciated...

Thanks

since it does not hold them responsible for any data lost/and business interruption if normal/standard procedure is not follow up when troubleshooting problem

Sounds like your standard software vendor disclaimer to me. Airplane manufacturers are liable for disasters caused by bad engineering.

But as we all know, building software is incredibly more complicated than manufacturing an airplane. ;)

I don't think it waves responsiblity for a standard baan sessions corrupting all of your data or something like that.. it just states that if you want the analyst doing GTM for you, then you accept the concequences =)

Dave

Dave,
I guess what I'm thinking is that there should be some responsability on SSA, since when asking for help through support, remote controlling is a frequently required & need it option and since 1) they are the experts and 2) support is not free....

I'm pretty sure if I do something in a critical system (including Baan) that effects normal business operations my company will hold me accountable...
Is not the same on your side?

I'm pretty sure we will end up signing the form, but just wanted to get some ideas from other users as well :-)

Francesco,
I agree... software is a lot more complicated to build than airplanes... not :-)



Thanks both

All of SSAs other products are hands off, and they're standardizing across all of their products now.. They like that Baan is hands on, but they can't accept liability for it (especally for other products, which are getting this form as well...)

If you were to call with a Manman problem you might get told what to do, but nobody would do it for you. With Baan that's always been a luxury, we're very use to it.

Let's compare to other software vendors... Have you ever tried to get oracle support to log into your system? Unless its already REALLY broken they just don't do it. (or at least I'm not mean enough to get them to...)
At best they'll send someone out to look at the problem but that's consulting, and it costs more and the liability is built into the price.

Does anyone have experience with SAP, PeopleS...er Oracle Apps?
I think a comparison of support $$ vs. hands on would be interesting to see.. For what I pay for oracle "support" I think Baan is a good deal.

Dave

.. it just states that if you want the analyst doing GTM for you, then you accept the concequences...

I think that would be reasonable so long as the analyst clearly stated what she/he was doing that you could not do (under her/his instruction if necessary).

I think that access authorization should only be available on a specific call basis (just for this call) and it be clearly agreed by SSA that no "information" is to be extracted or sessions run without your express written consent.

Whilst the SSA organization may have no direct interest in your company's business data, an errant or disgruntled employee should not have any opportunity to gain access to data that may be useful to someone else (even her/his next employer).

However, SSA may be interested in your parameter settings or other technical details as a short-cut for projects that they may be undertaking for another customer whom you would rather not assist. They may also gain insight into your business that may assist them in negotiating additional projects, charges or fees.

(This could even be for supply of upgrade software to which you think the annual support charges that your company has paid for years entitle you. I think SSA call this their: "Value Proposition" -- they provide to address an identified business need for which you are prepared to pay a fee.)

Terry

I agree, i think that's a good idea. It might slow things down quite a bit though, I know some companies that won't sign anything until their legal department looks it over.

I wonder if it would have been possible to have a form contract that was term limited like Terry says and then have legal go over it once, then the user has the ability to accept it on their own. That'd be ideal!

Dave

...Does anyone have experience with SAP, PeopleS...er Oracle Apps?...For what I pay for oracle "support" I think Baan is a good deal...Dave

We have Oracle support for RDBMS and for APPS (financials) and regard their support as the measure against which others would do very well to emulate.

We do not regard Baan/SSA support as good, even though we now have very little need for it. We have had excellent help from Oracle with Apps problems about which our domain knowledge is limited compared to our Baan knowledge.

Even with out-of-support versions Oracle have given us "follow-the-sun" support and even telephoned over the weekend, from the other side of the globe, because we had not responded to their emails (while we had to catch some shut-eye) within a few hours. They have also offered to dial-in if the next suggestion didn't work.

On the otherhand Baan/SSA have refused to provide support during the 9to5 business hours for which we pay, because of public holidays in their head-office state of residence (ie: not national holiday and not a holiday for us).

Whilst we can not divulge cost/pricing on this forum, we regard the Oracle charges as much better value (and lower) than SSA. Oracle split the charges into two components, both of which are compulsory, they price the support element separately to the upgrade component.

Another honourable aspect of Oracle's ethos, is that they happily provide new media for all software when requested. New versions and supported back-versions alike. Try getting an upgrade from SSA.

I think it is a pitty that Baan wasn't big enough to be of interest to Oracle.

Terry

It seems that over here the positions are completely reversed, when I try to call oracle, after waiting in queue for a half an our, I get a trained monkey who asks me to try asinine things. After we exhaust the monkey's talent he refers me to higher level support, which will maybe call me back in the next couple of days, but will most likely just attach a comment to the case asking for all of the info that the trained monkey asked for earlier.

In the end, I call Baan support and generally the first guy I talk to fixes it, even though its not their problem.

Oracle's a lot bigger than Baan ever was, or SSA is now.. their support should be top notch, everywhere. What you described shouldn't be the exception but the rule. It's no excuse for the crappy Baan support you have to deal with - but Oracle's support falls on its ass for me, every time I try to use 'em.

Oh, and I'm swimming in Baan software. I email upgradesATbaan.com
and it comes in the mail. Free. Whatever I'd like to try as long as its GA...

Dave

Dave

I do agree that Oracle do ask for a standard set of basic information even when you know it can't possily be relevant to the question you are asking. It is also a anoying when the automated suggested solutions miss the point of your question. Overall I still give them A+.

As for the first guy at Baan fixing your problem. You certainly have a different organisation to deal with. We have had cases where have not had simple answers until the Regional VP has got involved (at our suggestion).

I think that the fact that the biggest customers are in the US means that you have a US style operation rather than a European organisation considering the Pacific region as mere colonies. Now that it is SSA we hope to see changes but they do not appear to have "shaken" the local support operation as yet. Still the same managers.

Terry

I think that the fact that the biggest customers are in the US means that you have a US style operation rather than a European organisation considering the Pacific region as mere colonies.

Anybody from Profuse care to reply? :D

We're getting a little off-topic here.

As much as I understand the rammifications, I still find it ridiculous that the software industry has always managed to place itself above normal consumer rights.

If a trained Baan expert, an SSA mechanic, attempts to repair your system and loses your entire accounts receivable data, then they should be held responsible for that...period.

No other industry can get away with these kinds of disclaimers and I don't see one good reason why the software industy should be exempt. To me it shows little faith in their capabilities or trust in their product.

I totally agree with Francesco.
To me the agreement feels like I being told:
- You are paying me to fix/support your system
- But you just signed a agreement where I not liable if I make it worst
- Any productivity lost you experienced because of my actions is not my problem
- Bottom line, I'm not responsible of my own actions, just sign... thank you very much..

Also, I do understand there are different support levels in the software industry, some better, some worst, costly or cheaper, so one alternative that was mentioned earlier in this thread, is the option where you could sign an agreement for GTM (much different from a read-only remote control, which I don't even see the need for a disclaimer) for each individual case basis, once both parties exausted options (testing in test enviroment, replicating error/bug, applying fix in test env, etc)


Hopefully, we can hear more feedback from other users as well

But I get to disagree :). First why are you letting them into a production system? That is what test is for - you can always load a test environment for them. Second if you make the choice to let them into the system, then you are responsible for the data and their actions. We pay Baan to support the code and data structures - not our data. You can always shut your system down, do a back-up, then let Baan into your system without user access. Baan support has been very reasonable when working with us - not perfect, but getting bettor.

Second - If you feel you can not trust anyone outside your company to be perfect, then just do not sign the agreement and do not give them access. If there is continual problems then you can always use the legal system.

So now I have to ask - How many software development have developed a program and never had to make a change? Better yet how many always write perfect programs the first time? How many DBA's have never made a mistake? If there is one let me know I probably what to recruit them to work for me. You can only do so much to insure that things work without mistakes.

Mark

If your production system is broke, then it is your production system that needs fixed, n'est-ce pas?

I am not trying to single out Baan with my rant. My grudge is with the industry (of which I am a part myself).

I also am a notoriously sloppy coder myself. but that is what QA, SDLC and Test-test-TEST are for. Again, it is no different then constructing a bridge or a high-rise. Imagine engineering and contracting firms having you sign a disclaimer every time you cross the Golden Gate.
"We did the best we could, but we cannot guarantee that you won't drop in the bay when crossing this bridge. By entering this structure you agree that you are SCREWED if your vehicle ends up below sea level."

I like the analogy. :) I think a life and death situation is a little different. I understand you are trying to stress a point, but it is not quite the same thing. Just like Ford and Firestone. Just because you got a flat tire did not mean that you could sue them. You could, of course, get new tires when the offer was made. There are limits to what your recourse is.

In this industry I look at how they support me - if vendor a sales me a product(like disc drives) that fail most of the time(causes business impact) and support was poor, then I would to replace it with something different. Risk analysis and business impact should always play a part in the decision. So if you feel the risk is that great, build Baan an environment to work in. As for the bridge - ask yourself this as you cross them - Do you feel lucky today???

I saw you and daniel replying and was wondering who would actually post the reply first. What a topic - I have to go catch a plane at this time. Hope they had good quality assurance for building and repairing it. :)

Mark

We can basically leave the software portion out of it, I doubt that any software company would say that they are not liable for our software screwing up your system (if you use it right..)

This form is all about support people logging onto your system and manipulating your data. You have 2 ways you can go:
1) Sign the form and accept that Baan analysts will make mistakes and you'll have to deal with the results (but I'm sure they'd offer to help, free of charge)
or
2) Don't sign the form and play "get-a-rock" with Baan analysts and have your problems take 10x as long to resolve.

As Mark says, you're not paying Baan to maintain your data, they maintain the software, everything else is a convenience.

Dave

[ Added later ]
Argh, I reply to one point and 2 others are made while I'm typing!
this is fun!

Mark,
First, support for us is the last option in our check list. We go through the process of duplicating error in test co, test package vrc and if need it, in test server. Research knowledge base, baanboard, what ever it takes to fix/correct problem. If none of those work, we call Baan. True, we can always restore from backup and agree that they can get into our system with no users.. Also I totally agree that I'm responsible for the data, (if any case I need to recover from a mistake...), but disagree that I'm responsible for their actions. Why? Because I have to assume they are the experts and they know their product better than I do. Also, if there are some downtime while I'm recovering from backup and business operations get affected as a result of a change made by support, I don't see how this could end up to be our responsibility.

Second, trust... good one. Actually we trust Baan a lot. Is not a matter of being perfect either.. I'm not... Baan support is not, nobody is... I guess I'm not worry about small changes, but in a hypothetical worst case scenario it could mean a lot for a small company or even a bigger company. You see where I'm going?

Third, I think I address part of "perfection" issue in prior comment. Just wanted to add, that I'm really comfortable with the way Baan supports fixes with SP's, weekly solutions, PMC ... etc, so we acknowledge and accept that they will develop software that is not perfect the first time..

Probably created the perception that I'm uncomfortable with Baan support or with the product, but I'm not.. We are really please with support and the software..

Finally, I'm with Francesco... I'm not against Baan or their support but the industry standard about disclaimers.

If Baan (or whoever made the mistake) is responsible for the time it takes to recover, are they then responsible for the recovery itself? What if you have a crummy recovery procedure that takes several days? What if there is no backup? (Heck yea, they are out there). Are they responsible for your business if you go under because the system was hosed?

There are endless possiblities that are not under their control. I think that this can be an emotional topic, that people on the company side will feel strongly one way about it, those of us on the consulting side will feel another. I agree, it comes down to trust. It should be a last resort, GTM in Production by Baan, right? If you are in that situation, it's best to have the most qualified person look at the problem, again agreeing that no one is perfect. Since they are the 'best' you can generally TRUST that they will take every precaution to NOT cause a catistrophic failure. If they do, it's a 'Disaster'. If something happens to the systems, the better the disaster control, the less interruption to real time operations that occur. Disaster recovery is the Admin's / Companies repsonsibility. If your company cannot get along without the system for a few hours during disaster recovery without wanting to sue somebody for financial reimbursement, then you should have a hot backup running...no?

But financial responsiblity does not mean personal responsibility. Baan support, I have found, will take personal responsibility, as mentioned in the above responses. I have found them willing to do whatever it takes, free of charge (if you are on support), into the evening and weekends if needed to help recover systems. But they will not write a check for the downtime. What company does?

Lisa,

Again...my rant is not directed at Baan, but at the industry (of which I am a part myself) as a whole. I merely used Daniels example with Baan support as a stepping stone to mount my soap box.
And yes, there is shared responsibility just like with other purchases. For example, if the wheels of your car come off under normal driving conditions, you have a suit against GM. If they come off while being chased by Sherrif Roscoe P. Coltrane, you're on your own.
But the analogy doesn't end there. If your mechanic sets out to put the wheels back under your vehicle, but breaks the rear axle instead. How would you feel about a disclaimer statement of your local shop saying that its basically your problem for having their mechanic service your car?
That is exactly what Daniel is talking about.

Dave,
Obviously we don't have a choice in the matter. We need their support, so we will sign on the dotted line every single time. My soul is split between so many software vendors that I will probably spend enternity in some kind of beta version of reality.

Mark,
Unless the captain asks all passengers to start flapping their arms, you should be in good shape.
But one more just for the heck of it. What would people say if Boeing suggested to stop and start their system in mid air to see if that will fix the issue? :D

Well, you can't very well make a backup of your car and restore it if it is messed up....I don't think the comparison with other industries is Oranges to Oranges.

My point is for all software developments - is Oracle cutting checks for downtime? Microsoft?? (Ha! - my doc did not save, I have to retype it, it took HOURS, you owe me....x$$) Nothing is specific to Baan or SSA, but to the industry.

I am waiting for the day that some company with nothing better to do files suit against Microsoft for yet another $10,000 wasted on patching the same security hole they misconstructed five years ago.
Serious negligance, your honor. Malpractice!

Why can't WE as software developers, build a product that is _guaranteed_ to work? Why are we exempt to normal consumer expectations?
Sure it would make software development (even) more expensive, but it is nothing compared to the damages sustained by companies from faulty software.

Let's also not forget that most software companies willingly and knowingly release buggy software. After all, the 80/20 rule applies and it takes 80% of the total effort to fix the last 20% of all bugs. It is much easier to release the product unfinished and let your customers do your beta testing for you.

From one fruit to another ;) it won't be long until normal consumer awareness hits our corner of the market and we will have to adapt to this line of thinking. The novelty of our product(s) is wearing off and a whole new generation of consumers that actually understands our business is ready to step to the plate.

Let's forget about compensation because that is not the real issue here... and I'm not talking about getting compensated because I lost a word document either...
But the whole deal, it is a matter of principles.. just like Francesco is saying..
How takes responsability for a paid service? The payer or the payee?

If you can't afford hot spares & replication, faster backups/restores, which ends up to be a business descision (how much is worth for a company to be without critical systems for a few hours?), then its OK to bring the system down for a few hours, lose productivity and above all, be all your fault?

Still the whole idea is that your investing money to get things fixed not the other way around and with disclaimers that great idea about supports gets a little bit gray...

OOOFFFF - time for a counter punch!! :)

danielv:

I guess I missed something. If compensation is not the goal - then what does taking responsibility mean? Does this mean they just have to say sorry and help with the reconstruction of the lost data? They will do that - I have seen it. But some companies would want money for down time, these companies are the one you need the document for. In our case we built baan a complete separate company from development and test. This was where they got access to fix data, test programs, etc. In our case the time spent doing this was better than just jumping in and working in production.

We have "standard disclaimers." in the code and utility forum. Just like open source - do you use this in your company?

Francesco:

Why can't WE as software developers, build a product that is _guaranteed_ to work? Why are we exempt to normal consumer expectations?
Sure it would make software development (even) more expensive, but it is nothing compared to the damages sustained by companies from faulty software.


Then you could not afford any software. Windows would not exist and so on and so fourth. I would love to always build the perfect program. But how would you test? You never know when there might be sixth tuesday of the month type event that causes the program to fail. With my customers it scares me to think that I would have to "think" like them.

Next if you developed the perfect software you could not charge for support, there would be no R&D. Nobody would ever upgrade or change, the world wide economy would degrade, massive layoffs, dogs shacking up with cats, no end to the madness. I think you just caused the world civilization to collapse. :)

I would love to see a microsoft suit about that. Better yet just get them to fix that "General Protect Fault" error on my windows 98.

Dave_23:

You have to be quick around here sometimes. :)

Mark

As the great pointless debate continues - no winners, no losers, just lots of good converstaion.

We have "standard disclaimers." in the code and utility forum. Just like open source - do you use this in your company?
Open source is a different subject. I don't pay millions of dollars for it for starters.
Then you could not afford any software.
I often wonder if I can afford it now. It is interesting to know btw, that research has shown that there is no connection between software investments and increased revenue. In most cases, software and software maintenance is so expensive that ROI will never be realized.
I would love to always build the perfect program. But how would you test? You never know when there might be sixth tuesday of the month type event that causes the program to fail. With my customers it scares me to think that I would have to "think" like them.
Now see? It's THAT kind of mentality that prevents us from building an acceptable solution ;)

Next if you developed the perfect software you could not charge for support
I drive a Caddilac Allante, which was as close to a perfect car as you could get 15 years ago. My dealer charges me up the ying yang for "support".

There would be no R&D. Nobody would ever upgrade or change
Not only do I drive a 15 year old car, if it had 32-bit functionality I would still be using Windows 3.1. Maybe by now Microsoft would have plugged the memory leak. As a matter of fact, I am still pissed off at Invensys for _forcing_ me to invest in Crystal Reports, right after I invested Lord knows how much resources in getting Safari to work properly.
As for the rest of the world, most people are happy to buy a new car every 4 years and Longhorn is already eagerly awaited.

I would love to see a microsoft suit about that. Better yet just get them to fix that "General Protect Fault" error on my windows 98.
No chance on that. Consider yourself lucky that 98 is still "supported".

The debate might be pointless, but I'm having fun none the less :D

I like these type debates. :)


Open source is a different subject. I don't pay millions of dollars for it for starters.


But it comes with standard disclaimers, no promised support and can be even more damaging to the company than supported customers.

In most cases, software and software maintenance is so expensive that ROI will never be realized.

I can not be sure about this - how could I run without Oracle, Baan, etc. Without the apps how could we ever achieve what we do achieve in the manufacturing plant. I can not imagine what it must have been like 40 years ago building one of our systems.


Now see? It's THAT kind of mentality that prevents us from building an acceptable solution.


But it is realistic. How to you ever cover every possiblity? I am a firm believer that you test as much as possible - then put it into production and let the real users go at it. Seems there is always something that crops up. I mean how do you plan for a user who enters Prod. Order Number into Warehouse Order Number. Then releases everything. From the end users perspective your program did not work.


As a matter of fact, I am still pissed off at Invensys for _forcing_ me to invest in Crystal Reports, right after I invested Lord knows how much resources in getting Safari to work properly.


How did they force you to do this? Didn't you have a choice of staying with what was working?

Mark

I have just one thing to say. To stop them from entering W/H Order # instead of Production #, use Barcoding :D Put a Prefix of 'W' on the W/H orders, and 'P' on production, and they will not be able to make that mistake again.

We learn, we adapt, we build solutions as the problems are found, by us or by the users. The problem being, there are always more problems!

Good suggestion, but that site does not use barcodes or scanners. :) All three sites do something a little different, mainly because of how they operate. Really makes it tough to automate somethings. As a matter of fact I was just in a meeting this week over this - one user wanted the system to know something was source inspected before they told it. ESP programs are the wave of the future. :)

Mark

We learn, we adapt, we build solutions as the problems are found, by us or by the users. The problem being, there are always more problems!

I re-phrase it as - Opportunities for Improvement.

I like the famous quote - "Rome was not built in a day". So there will be fixes/patches/solutions/service-packs/next-releases, the cycle goes on.

Some go by the way - If it aint broken why fix it.

Here is a cartoon to add to the humor

Ahhh yes. Then Rome became infested with infrastructure, corruption, overreaching of boundaries beyond their ability to control, obsolete function calls, duplicate data, endless red tape and collapsed.. hmmm..yes, I like your analogy.

If compensation is not the goal - then what does taking responsibility mean? Does this mean they just have to say sorry and help with the reconstruction of the lost data?

The goal means admit something was done wrong, assuming that responsibility to fix it (at least) and amending all repercutions.

But some companies would want money for down time, these companies are the one you need the document for.

Well... I'm not working in a non-profit organization... but would you agree to pay for poor service? How about revaluating maintenance fees? It does not have to be a check ... its all I'm saying... Of course at this point I'm not trying to convince anybody :-)

In our case we built baan a complete separate company from development and test.
I totally agree with this idea, perhaps I might follow your suggestion and never allow Baan and other vendors to access my production environment.. but what if you can't replicate problem in test server? what if you can't afford two identical systems (test & production)? Does it mean that you are out of luck?

The debate might be pointless, but I'm having fun none the less

Francesco, anytime your in San Diego, I will buy you a beer :-)

The goal means admit something was done wrong, assuming that responsibility to fix it (at least) and amending all repercutions.

But most reputable companies do all of the above. The document just keeps frivolous lawsuits from happening.


but what if you can't replicate problem in test server? what if you can't afford two identical systems (test & production)? Does it mean that you are out of luck?

That is what risk assessments are for. If it would cost your company 100K to be down for a day, then rent a server or make other arrangements. Of course the higher the figure gets the easier the assessment is.


Francesco, anytime your in San Diego, I will buy you a beer :-)


But this nothing like a good shot of kentucky bourbon to warm the heart and help Francesco seeing the errors of his way. :)

Mark

Ha Mark - you beat me to the enter key again. This is certainly a hot topic. I echo what Mark said earlier, from my experience they have always stepped up and taken responsibility in terms of fixing the problem, and fixing the results of the problem when it's under their control. I have never in my 10 years of consulting seen Baan support mess up so bad that this is even in question. I understand others may have a different story, that's just my experience. If something that serious did happen, I agree things like your support dollars, other considerations would be on the table to discuss. That's where the trust comes in - you are still their customer and they do want to keep you. You would have to trust that if something catastrophic happens that you would meet a satisfactory agreement, in support, consulting fees, whatever is under their control.

Folks, folks...I really need to lay of the booze. My liver is acting up and my hands are shaking like a leaf as it is. My physician asked me if I drank a lot and I had to tell him "not nearly as much as I spill".

I am settled in (or near) Boise, Idaho now, so whenever any of you makes it up here, I will throw in some Chateau Sawtooth without any hidden intentions. When in Rome....

BTW Mark, I had an easier time finding my favorite bourbon (Rebel Yell) in Holland than I do anywhere north of the Mississippi. Are you guys holding out on the rest of us?

Anywho...

How did they force you to do this? Didn't you have a choice of staying with what was working?
This happened past yesterday, so my memory is a little vague on the details but I believe the issue was that they changed the reporting engine in a certain service pack. At the same time Baan support told me they could not properly support my (crappy) 5b system unless I kept up to date with the service packs. Rocks and hard places, meet me in the middle.

Folks, I have many friends at Baan support (or I used to anyway), and I will say one more time that my rant is not directed at them per se. Over the years I have seen a lot of improvement in their support system as a whole, and I don't believe I have ever had an issue that we could not resolve as a team.

The software industry as a whole however needs to stop hiding behind disclaimers. Either you have a reliable product or you don't. If you do, you should take full responsibility for it. The novelty has worn out and the exempt position that it has taken from the start expired.
Is an average software program more complex than building a transistor radio? Think about how many possibilities of usage manufacturers of baby toys have to consider and still come up with a reasonably priced, safe, and working product.
Sure, it is not the same thing. But it is not entirely different either. On a Platonic level, we create products, and these products should be expected to perform at an acceptable level (price/quality). Consumers should not be mandated to waive any kind of legal action against any and all blunders from the producers. No matter how you look at it, that is simply wrong.
We all understand the potential disastrous consequences this might have for software manufacturers, but hey....it works both ways only now the consumers are at the mercy of their support contract (nights and weekends cost extra) and the willingness and motivation of their software vendor without any legal means.
The middlemen, implementation partners and resellers, get sued left and right for crappy work that ends up costing their customers millions and millions of dollars. Nobody would hire a consultant who first hands out a disclaimer form stating that he will not be held responsible for any screw-ups by him or his collegues though.
So again, what makes the software industry so damn special?

And with that closing statement, I will retreat until the issue inevetably resubmerges.

Belated Happy Holidays to all of you :)

Will have to look around for Rebel Yell - do not seem to recall this, but of course I never look at Bourbons or Whiskey type products. :)

I understand your rant is not directed at Baan. But the disclaimers they use are pretty much standard for the industry. First signing the disclaimer does not mean you give up the right for legal action. I have seen several vendors sued when they promoted a product that would do what you required and it did not perform. The disclaimers prevent someone from abusing a product and then wanting to take legal action.

Even patches come with disclaimers - one of the reasons I always say - DO NOT INSTALL patches unless you are actually having a problem. Can't you imagine the cost that would be invovled to customize every patch(hardware, software, etc.) for every customer you have so that you do not need that disclaimer. Something that is just not feasible.

I agree that you either have a quality product or you don't!! But who gets to decide it is a quality product or not? Which customers - the one that use the software correctly or the ones that don't. The problem is that not everyone in the industry(actually any industry) is honest. So for example - How could you sue a vendor if the software works at one site and not at another?

Mark

This post is following me home. I was watching that 'Airport' show last night. They had some passengers who's flight was delayed, then they missed their connecting flight. The woman was complaining - 'I missed my flight, I now need to get a hotel overnight, and the parking...this will run me over $100." The airline response: here's free drink tickets, free transfers to the new flight, etc. They are not going to pay for the parking fees, let alone any further business expenses that occured because the passenger did not reach their destination on time.

So, not unique to the software industry only, the service industry too. Whenever you try to mass market a service, there is contention on what is successful and what is not. Since the agreement in question was for service of their tables, I think this qualifies as a service industry related issue, not even software related.