Re: Ada is getting more popular!

["Chad R. Meiners" <chad.rmeiners@gmail.com>]

On Oct 28, 5:41 am, Thomas Løcke <t...@ada-dk.org> wrote:
> Hmm.. Yes and no.
>
> Back in 2000 I bought a product from a vendor. This product is an
> important part of my business. It has over the years evolved, and
> they've kept it running to my satisfaction. I've paid them A LOT of
> money to develop new features.
>
> Then came Windows 7.
>
> The vendor refused to update the software to be able to run on Win7,
> and while they were at it, they also decided to stop supporting the
> product completely.
>
> They do not intend to offer a version 2 of this product.
>
> The result of this is that my business is now running on borrowed
> time. There are no similar products readily available, and the ones
> there are, would require completely redifining how my business operates,
> re-schooling all my employees and telling customers that services
> they've relied on for many years are going to vanish.
>
> I've asked if I could buy the source, and was met with a blank stare.
>
> Black box.
>
> An extended warranty would hardly have solved this issue. This one
> piece of software, which 2 years ago was just a tool, has become a
> ticking bomb.
>
> I can't upgrade to Win7. I can't get support. I can't do anything about
> it. I'm stuck on XP with a software suite that has been abandoned
> without any prior warning.

Can you not run the software on Windows 7 with a VM of XP?  I know
this does not help with the problem of the dropped support for the the
software.

I would surmise that the company is dropping support because it is no
longer profitable to maintain the code base.  This could be due to a
variety of factors.   In the case you bought access to the code, you
may not be able to add any new features that you desire for reasonable
cost.

I agree that if you had access to the code to begin with, your risk
mitigation would be easier.  However, if you did not take an active
role in the code's development, you could still be left with a mess of
code that is of no benefit.   I have built systems that when they
where returned to me to fix, they where unrecognizable.  I had access
to the code during the whole process, but I was too busy to maintain a
watch over it.  As a result, I had to scrap the existing systems and
start a new one because the time spent fixing the damage was more than
starting over.

I agree this situation is not good, but I don't know if open source
would have fixed it.  Maybe it would have helped you realize that
there was a problem sooner.  I do hope that the situation resolves in
your favor, but I don't think the problem is due to close source, but
instead it is due to the vendor not representing its and your
situation correctly.   It seems that instead of relying on open source
you should insist of guarantees (by law) of availability and support.