RH rips again Was: extend EOL for Red Hat Linux 9?

[Rodolfo J. Paiz]

At 18:39 4/13/2004, you wrote:
>What I was trying to show is that
>RedHat marketing should have done good faith renewals or refunds to
>anyone having been automatically renewed when less than 12 months were
>left on the product's life.  Most people signed up to RHN when there was
>no plans to discontinue producing RHL.  That is all I was trying to get
>across.

Luc, I agree that it would have been a smart marketing strategy for RH to 
offer partial refunds to those who strongly felt they wanted to discontinue 
RHN service after RHL-9 EOL. So if you had RHN until June, I think it would 
have been smart marketing for RH to offer you a $10 refund for the two 
months after RHL-9 EOL... and of course terminate your access to RHN on 
April 30th, too.

However, this thread was not about what { wiser | smarter | nicer | 
better-received } things RH could have done with their marketing. Guy 
Fraser said he felt ripped off and that RH's behavior was unethical; 
several of us have been rebutting that assertion.

Cheers,


-- 
Rodolfo J. Paiz
rpaiz at simpaticus.com
http://www.simpaticus.com