Light ROM 4/Light ROM 4 - Disc 1.iso/text/maillist/1995/1095.doc/001060_owner-lightwav…mail.webcom.com_Wed Oct 18 08:45:03 1995.msg

Internet Message Format | 1995-11-07 | 2KB

Received: by mail.webcom.com
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA114681103; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:45:03 -0700
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from kitfox.anv.net by mail.webcom.com with ESMTP
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA114351083; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:44:43 -0700
Received: from Bighorn (ppp001.anv.net [205.199.152.11]) by kitfox.anv.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA20367 for <[e-mail]>; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:38:48 -0700
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <[e-mail]>
From: "Eric Gooch" <[e-mail]>
Organization:  Westwood Studios
To: [e-mail]
Date:          Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:38:51 +0000
Subject:       Re: Bad business: Selling Betas
Reply-To: [e-mail]
X-Confirm-Reading-To: [e-mail]
X-Pmrqc:       1
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.0-WB1)
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

> > From:          [e-mail] (robert hood)

<snip>

> Considering what NewTek did with LightWave 4.0 (not to mention the practices
> of other companies, like MarketingSoft), is the trend in selling Betas a good
> or bad idea?

It's a good idea. Nobody is forcing anyone to work with Beta
versions of software. As long as it's made clear at the outset
that what you're selling is indeed beta, the buyer pays his
money and takes his chances, and it's his choice. If others
don't want to gamble with a beta, that's their choice, they can
wait for the final.

I always grab beta versions whenever they become available. I'm
willing to deal with the vagaries of beta software. Those who
aren't shouldn't spoil it for the rest of us.

-Eric G.
--
"Eric Gooch" <[e-mail]> sent this message.
To Post a Message           : [e-mail]
Un/Subscription Requests To : [e-mail]
(DIGEST)                 or : [e-mail]
Administrative Items To     : [e-mail]