|
ISTech Support Forum
http://www.istechforum.com/YaBB.pl Evo-ERP and DBA Classic >> Evo Menu & Evo-ERP >> Source code? http://www.istechforum.com/YaBB.pl?num=1159410729 Message started by kkmfg on 09/27/06 at 18:32:09 |
|
Title: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/27/06 at 18:32:09 I tried emailing IS Tech about this but they don't always respond to emails soon enough to please impatient people like me. Of course, I'm not yet a paying customer so I don't totally blame them. ;) Anyhow, does Evo and the IS Tech DBA Classic updates come with the TAS source code like DBA does or not? Inquiring minds want to know. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by NovaZyg on 09/27/06 at 20:20:44 No. We do not give out source code. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/28/06 at 04:28:46 NovaZyg wrote:
Umm... May I ask why not? All of DBA comes with the source code on CD. Now you are telling me that your additions and changes DON'T come with the corresponding source code? How, exactly, do you justify that? |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by David Waldmann on 09/28/06 at 09:56:32 kkmfg wrote:
Is that in disagreement with your license? |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/28/06 at 10:56:34 I see where you are going with that... That I'm complaining but yet they've got no requirement to provide the source according to my license. Yes, I'm sure that's true. But it's still a great shame because now the source code I have from standard DBA is worthless if I upgrade to EVO. It will then be incompatible and not match up with the system I am using. I feel that it's in bad faith to take over a product that is essentially open source and then make a bunch of changes and not release them. They benefited from that open source nature! Were it not for that EVO would probably not exist at all. They took the source code to the old dba and modified it. It was great for them, now they turn around and close up the shop? What gives? Is it against the license? I'll bet not. Is it unethical? You bet. Of course, I'm sure 99% of the userbase doesn't care one way or the other but for us 1% who can program and who would be interested in doing their own mods, this is a major disappointment. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by David Waldmann on 09/29/06 at 03:17:43 Actually, my point is that as with all software if you don't like the license you don't have to buy it. I suppose you could say that ISTS has benefitted by vitue of the open source code, but I think that the users have benefitted far more. Further, even original DBA has a relatively small customer base, but I'm pretty sure that the Evo product has one that is quite lot smaller, and therefore IMHO are "justified" in holding on to their work to make sure they're paid for it. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 05:21:00 There is no inherent danger in their work being 'stolen' just because they release the source code with their work. No more so, anyway, then there already was. The source to the various modules will still not be of much use without the runtime program (EvoERP.exe) and without a valid license. The only real valid reason for locking up the source is to lockout the competition so you can get more business. If I had the source I could make mods and not have to pay them. That's obviously not what they'd like to see happen. They want to write the mods for me so they can charge me more. So, from a business sense, what they are doing probably makes sense. From an ethical standpoint is is just plain wrong. One should not take something for free and benefit from it and then turn around and lock it up so nobody else can benefit. I'm reminded of the lyrics to a modern song 'We drink from the rivers then we turn around and put up our walls.' So, my argument, is that they are being greedy even in the face of the original company NOT being greedy. One of the really great things about DBA was it's openness. There isn't really any good excuse for what they are doing. We want to rake you over the coals is NOT a valid excuse. I suppose what makes me most angry about this is that all too many companies see open source as their free lunch and a good way to jump ahead but then they want to turn around and lock things up. That's not how it works. You got your jumpstart and now it's time to pass the love around. ;-) |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by dameng on 09/29/06 at 06:25:39 kool, so based on your argument. your Employer, should no longer have to Pay you anything for the work you do! because your efforts are now open and free! i'm sure they appreciate that. you have the choice to Purchase the Licensing rights and Purchase the Compiler from DBA Software, IF you can still get ahold of them and talk them into it. Istechsupport has PURCHASED the license from DBA Software, they have PURCHASED the Compiler, they have Programmers that they Pay for their Efforts, and most importantantly, IStechsupport have Customers that have needs for different functionality and design, and IStechsupport provides more to their customers than DBA Software ever did in the past. share the love. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by GasGiant on 09/29/06 at 06:51:56 DBA Software gives free access to the source code for a product they abandonned years ago? Wow, that's very generous! ::) |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 07:06:25 They gave you the free source code with DBA when you bought it. It's not like they open sourced it afterwards. You always did get the source code. So it's more generous then you might have believed. GasGiant wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 07:16:52 What a way to spin what I said in a totally tangent direction. I'm not quite sure where, exactly, you came up with that. My argument is that DBA always gave you the source code when you purchased DBA and thus ISTech had access to the code. They've now turned around and done modifications but they don't in turn release their code even though it's based on code that every DBA customer has. BTW, the DBA sourcecode was done in TAS and DBA is not the producer of TAS. Maybe they can hook you up with the compiler but so can CAS who actually DO produce TAS. I can buy the compiler from CAS for $399 with unlimited distribution rights of my works. That's really quite reasonable. The only possible counter to my argument is the licensing of the DBA code. I'm not for sure what each DBA user's rights are with the code. Maybe you can make all the mods you want but need to get licensed with DBA to release those mods outside of your company. That would probably be fair. Still, EvoERP is no good without the technical underpinnings of DBA and thus all potential users of EvoERP are also valid DBA users with the source to the DBA modules at their disposal. That means that potentially ISTech could have released source diff's to the code that we already have and I could compile it here without ISTech ever releasing a drop of DBA code themselves. So I'm at a loss for why they can't release their changes. So I'd love to hear from ISTech themselves as to why they've locked down a formerly open source code. Maybe there is a good reason, maybe not. dameng wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 07:21:55 I never said that they shouldn't be paid. What a strawman argument! I said that they should release their changed source code in the same manner as DBA released their code: To each and every customer. Period. That's how DBA did it, it's how they should to. THEY STILL GET PAID THAT WAY. The only thing it does is open up the road for people competent enough to make their own changes. It's great that they do changes for customers and are responsive but what if I want to do it myself? DBA gave me the source to do it, why don't they? dameng wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by dameng on 09/29/06 at 07:45:10 actually, none of your arguments are valid. just self indulgent. if you apply your logic to opensource, you can go develop using Firebird database engine and your own compiler. istechsupport has no obligation to any code you've created or modified to run with dba classic or evo. for that matter, neither did DBA Software. all programming and custom programs are at the user risk. istechsupport has supported the customer user base that use dba classic and providing them added potential and functionality to the base form of the program itself. that's all i'm going to say on this thread. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 08:33:04 dameng wrote:
Well, obviously I beg to differ. You've really done nothing but try to marginalize my points and have offered very little in the way of a counter argument. Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean here... I can certainly develop things with firebird and my own compiler if I want. In fact, with the current version of TAS EvoERP could probably be modified to run using Firebird instead of PervasiveSQL. Quote:
I am unsure as to when I said that they did have some obligation. All I said was that their position of changing things and not releasing code causes an inability for people like me to create add-ons. DBA released their source code so that you could make additions. ISTech does not. I'm merely calling attention to the difference. Quote:
And for that I'm thankful. Don't get me wrong. I like what they've done and I appeciate that they've done it. I'm just very saddened by their determination to lock down a previously open archetecture. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by Dave Miller on 09/29/06 at 08:57:07 Sounds like this should be transfered to another topic ... matbe Fun Stuff???? |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by JNAPIER on 09/29/06 at 10:05:27 Nothing to see here, Move along, Keep it moving........... |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 11:00:05 I apologize if this topic has seemed like flamebait. I truly do feel the way I have indicated in this topic and I do believe that it's on-topic to discuss this in the EvoERP forum. After all, is this not about EvoERP? However, as it's obvious that I am totally alone in my viewpoint, I will drop the topic here. Sorry all if my opinion has caused a rift in spacetime. JNAPIER wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by lmk223a on 09/29/06 at 12:29:28 Since when did this become a IS TECH trashing forum? ??? ??? Let's move on. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by timgolds on 09/29/06 at 14:25:21 I've been watching this( as I use last 10 to keep up) and I'm tired of seeing this!??? Lets be demacratic about this issue and vote on banning kkmfg for life!>:( As for me it's EVO all the way! 8) |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 16:56:39 Ok, this attitude out of people on this board is not called for. I was voicing an honest concern and all anyone can do is jump down my throat. Thinking I should be banned for daring to question a company's decision? The gall I must have had thinking I could try to actually voice my concerns! This isn't second grade. I think that maybe, as adults, we can have a civil conversation. All I've ever asked is that if you do not agree with me then you try to give your side of the story in an articulate manner. So far there hasn't been a whole lot of articulation but there has been a great deal of knee jerk reactions. It's actually a good thing and a testament to ISTech that everyone here is so supportive of ISTech (even though I think that support may be a bit myoptic or blind). It's quite obvious that they have a great thing going and really do know how to please their customers (well, most of them). I do plan to have my company upgrade to Evo but I'm still disappointed at the no source stance. Make no mistake, my disappointment is not scheduled to stand in the way of my adoption of EvoERP. I will not apologize for voicing my true opinion or defending it here. Just because this board is hosted by ISTech does not mean that it is improper to voice concerns about them on the board. Go to any other company's message forum or newsgroup and see if everyone is in support of the company. I think that in reality I've been fairly low key. If you think my posts have been flame worthy you should try other forums and usenet some time. This is a birthday candle. ;-) Trust me, this topic has been far, far under my capability for flaming. Please, if you are tired of seeing this then quit reading. There is nobody forcing you with a gun to your head. If you don't like the topic don't partake. It's really quite simple. I never forced anybody to reply. I'm thankful that some people almost decided to answer my concerns but I wasn't forcing anyone into the discussion. BTW, it's Evo all the way for me too. As I've said many times so far in this thread, I like EvoERP. I like it a lot more than DBA. That's what makes me so mad. I can either choose to keep just DBA and be able to write mods or I can go with EvoERP and be locked out. I'm not overly happy at those options but given the choice I will most certainly choose EvoERP. And, also like I said, I'm not trying to argue this anymore. I give up. I wanted to end the topic and yet people still keep posting things about how I shouldn't question 'The Company'. ;-) Questioning is what makes the world go round. Just think of where the world would be if nobody questioned anything. And just to be clear, I really am sorry for all of this trouble. I never meant to start a war I just wanted to know why they did what they did. But it's gotten way out of hand. timgolds wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by Lynn Pantic on 09/29/06 at 18:10:31 I have stayed out of this so far, intentionally because I did not want to get caught up in what was about as close as this (relatively) tame and benign forum gets to a flame war (and NO, this is NOT a challenge to change that), but also because I was tied up at the User Symposium. We at IS Tech appreciate the posts defending our position but also recognize the validity of the original question and more importantly the "opposing point of view". Without challenges and questions, we don't progress. That said, I would like to say a couple of things that may help clarify our source code position and put this issue to bed. 1. Allen is correct, we do not provide source code for IS Tech updates. 2. DBA is not truly "Open Source" either because the license limits the use of the source code that is provided to licensed DBA users. Nobody can (legally) take the DBA Source Code, a TAS compiler, and generate programs for use by anybody who is not already a current DBA licensed customer. DBA has not always provided Source Code - it was a policy change in about 1998 or 1999 as I recall. That said, the ability for a user such as KKMFG to make their own changes holds some value. 3. IS Tech is the exception to #2 because we paid DBA for licensing rights allowing us to offer a product (Evo-ERP) based on the DBA Source to non-DBA customers as a new system. 4. The mods to DBA Classic that we have done over the past 4+ years (supported by our customer base) could, if the source code were released, be used by all the rest of the DBA Classic customer base in the Classic environment so there is in fact a real "inherent danger of work being stolen". 5. If you have the TAS compiler and have modified a program and need to know how our programs work, we can provide assistance in the way of file mapping (since we have created new tables), "hook" programs called by our programs that you can connect to for post-processing, and business logic portions of the source code on an as-requested basis. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/29/06 at 18:27:37 Thanks Lynn. I apologize that my posts were probably a bit too much on the flame side. I tried not to be too flameworthy but I know I didn't quite succeed. Your answer was indeed what I needed to hear and really did clear things up. I appeciate you taking the time to answer my questions. Your post really did clear things up for me and made me see that you do indeed have good reasons for your company's position. Your reason #4 was something I had not thought of. I suppose it does make sense that people could back port your changes to DBA classic and steal things. I do understand now. All in all, thanks for setting the record straight. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by dameng on 09/30/06 at 06:17:31 it's also a position that you should have articulated in the first place instead of claiming that istechsupport was being greedy, and the other false claims you made as well. you could have just asked, politely, about other avenues were available, so that all the custom programs you wrote for your company could somehow be integrated with the version that Istechsupport has developed. an ounce of sugar goes farther than a pound of salt. |
|
Title: Re: Source code? Post by kkmfg on 09/30/06 at 07:16:36 You know... I had a big post here and now I'm changing it. I know that I am guilty of the pound of salt rather than ounce of sugar and so I'll cut myself off here and just say that this topic has been discussed to it's conclusion and I'll try to be nicer in the future. dameng wrote:
|
|
ISTech Support Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.1! YaBB © 2000-2005. All Rights Reserved. |