Re: GNAT Support Costs

[kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <x7vzotxuhdv.fsf@pogner.demon.co.uk>, Simon Wright <simon@pogner.demon.co.uk> writes:
> Robert Kirkbride <rob@laptop.demon.co.uk> writes:

>> Because ACT seem to assume the smallest project will involve 10
>> programmers I am forced to have to consider another compiler.
> 
> You have to check out what it is you're getting for your money, and
> for how long. If you get a single copy of a compiler for a certain
> amount, as against ACT support for 9 more people than you need at
> considerably more, what is the support you will get like? you might
> find you can only raise a few incidents per year, for example. And
> there may be ongoing charges for subsequent years, too.

And there _might_ be a premium for using it on Tuesday's, but
all of this can be evaluated by the purchaser.  Certainly when
I enquired about ACT support there was a minimum number of seats
(although it was 3 at that time, not 10) and that dissuades those
who need less, and might not even be able to generate support
requests fast enough.  Of course ACT is free to set whatever
rules they want and anyone else is free to enter the GNAT support
business as a competitor. 

Larry Kilgallen