Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access (746 Views)
Reply
Honored Contributor
Peter Nikitka
Posts: 1,575
Registered: ‎02-10-2003
Message 1 of 11 (746 Views)

The new HP restrictions for patch access

Hello community,

being a not-so-active ITRC member in current days, I missed the announcements for the strategy change of HP for patch access in my holidays.
But just now, a new project established, where a customer wants to update PA-RISC based SW from 11iv1 to 11iv3 (software written by colleagues of mine; Oracle stuff involved). BTW: they want to stay on their PA-RISC servers ...

As I learned, our rp3410 has run out of support since a while, but fortunately the FAQ
http://www11.itrc.hp.com/service/cki/docDisplay.do?docId=emr_na-c02476621&docLocale=en&admit=1094476...
tells us:
Q:
What is the process to request a support agreement?
A:
If you do not have a current support agreement, contact your local HP office or representative to obtain valid support coverage.

OK, I did so...
But then got the happy news, that I had to invest an additional
18month penalty
of the support price as an 'entrance fee' for a new support contract!

If I had to find out a way to chase customers away, I'd take this HP action as a template.

As a friend of HP and ITRC member since years, I am disappointed deeply. I really felt ashamed, when I had to tell the project team this offering of HP.

mfG Peter

PS: I think, HP should tell us the whole truth and add a remark about this into the FAQ.
The Universe is a pretty big place, it's bigger than anything anyone has ever dreamed of before. So if it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space, right? Jodie Foster in "Contact"
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Steven Schweda
Posts: 9,079
Registered: ‎02-23-2005
Message 2 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

> [...] 18month penalty [...]

Is this really amazing? As a VMS hobbyist
(who has been left stranded by this policy
change), I have no particular sympathy for
the new policy, but I have no trouble at all
understanding why a company (which would like
to sell continuous service contracts) might
try to penalize a customer who would like to
get practically all the benefits of
continuous coverage while paying only
occasionally.

> [...] a way to chase customers away [...]

I'd call it a way to chase parasites away,
and to keep regular, paying customers paying
regularly (and not becoming parasites).
Please use plain text.
Exalted Contributor
Steven E. Protter
Posts: 33,806
Registered: ‎08-15-2002
Message 3 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

Shalom,

I could not agree more.

If I speculate as to the factors driving this decision, ITRC monitors will probably delete the post.

The penalty is outrageous and you should moan and whine and threaten to migrate to Sun and see if they back off.

SEP
Steven E Protter
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Steven Schweda
Posts: 9,079
Registered: ‎02-23-2005
Message 4 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

> [...] threaten to migrate to Sun [...]

You think that Sun (Oracle) lets you drop
support for years, and then buy a new support
contract and get all up-to-date with _no_
penalty? Being only a non-paying parasite, I
know nothing, but I'd be amazed.

Of course, one can always try to negotiate,
but indignation, and threats to go elsewhere,
might be more credible if the practice
causing the indignation were not a standard
(and rational) practice in the industry.
Please use plain text.
Exalted Contributor
Steven E. Protter
Posts: 33,806
Registered: ‎08-15-2002
Message 5 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

I'm a sponge.

I'm a hobbyist.

I admit it.

I have two HP-9000 servers in my home and no software support.

I used to download patches for them and build patch sets, and run tests, to maintain skills and help out on ITRC.

Now I don't have patch access. We're working on the issue here where I work, but for the moment, I can't play around with patches or recommend them on ITRC because I don't have access to the patch db.

This after how many posts to ITRC?

This after helping out many HP customers and presumably reducing the load on the Response Center?

SEP
Steven E Protter
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
Please use plain text.
Exalted Contributor
Steven E. Protter
Posts: 33,806
Registered: ‎08-15-2002
Message 6 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

Remarks withdrawn.

My browser was messed up. This ID seems to meet the criteria for having access to the patch database.

This is truly bizarre and I should probably shut up.

But There is a support case in there with a serial number from a system at my previous contract.

Quite strange.

Waiting for something to fall on my head.

SEP
Steven E Protter
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Peter Nikitka
Posts: 1,575
Registered: ‎02-10-2003
Message 7 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

Dear Steven,

>>
I'd call it a way to chase parasites away,
and to keep regular, paying customers paying
regularly (and not becoming parasites).
<<
Having no/a frozen project, who do you think gives a cent for extending a support contract?
I do not consider being a 'parasite':
When there is no use and request for (HP-)support, why should I have a budget for?

Helping other ITRC members and keeping knowhow up to date is a very expensive hobby in these days.

<<
You think that Sun ...
>>
The situation today at SUN (oracle might change this of course ..) is, that I can look a the description of patches, browse through information, ... without a support contract.
Downloading patches is unlimited only with a contract, else only security- oder common patches are accessible.
BTW: I think, I should try that and get a quote for a support contract from SUN: This way we all can compare the penalties.

More:
I consider buying a refurbished system. Let's look, what offers I'll get - especially for a piece with a support contract ;-)

mfG Peter
The Universe is a pretty big place, it's bigger than anything anyone has ever dreamed of before. So if it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space, right? Jodie Foster in "Contact"
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Steven Schweda
Posts: 9,079
Registered: ‎02-23-2005
Message 8 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

> Having no/a frozen project, [...]

If you don't need any updates ("frozen"),
then you may not need support.

> [...] a customer wants to update PA-RISC
> based SW from 11iv1 to 11iv3 [...]

That's not "frozen", then, is it?

> I consider buying a refurbished system.
> [...]

I buy only used junk on Ebay, so I know
nothing, but if buying hardware with a fresh
OS is cheaper than buying current support (or
a loose OS update) for existing hardware,
then it might make much sense to do that.
(Or explain that to the HP sales genius who
wants all your money for that support
contract, and see if that helps in your
negotiation.)

> BTW: I think, I should try that and get a
> quote for a support contract from SUN:
> [...]

Again, finding a better/cheaper alternative
from another vendor (or a different part of
the same vendor) can be a useful strategy
when trying to negotiate a better deal with
anyone. Or, if your preferred vendor won't
sweeten his deal, then you know where you can
get a better deal.

If HP actually starts to lose customers
(money) because of this policy change, then
it may reconsider. If its revenues only
grow, then it may congratulate itself for
making a clever move.
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Hakki Aydin Ucar
Posts: 1,313
Registered: ‎08-16-2006
Message 9 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

Even though in the first place seems reasonable decision by HP (because , at least they have reasons to do it;standardizing on key patch availability services reduces structural costs...) there is some problems in the other hand, like Peter's case.
Some times we need to fill gap between HP and Customers in case of somehow they did not extend support agreement somehow and we are supporting extra layer of support and needs patching for some problems. And after all ,some customer already accustomed to this workaround based support.
OR another reason for me I have some servers in my lab and some problems I need to try in lab server first due to customer have critical production server.

But I hope and believe, HP will find an optimum way to solve this problem in time,at least discounting in case of Peter's case for old customers support agreement OR some another way to make happy us ITRC members and Administrators.
Please use plain text.
Advisor
rjpierson
Posts: 27
Registered: ‎09-15-2010
Message 10 of 11 (746 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

I'm done for the day, finally got the new SWA downloaded and installed on a test system before actually putting it on one of my production boxes and ran it, ran fine to start. It failed with "ERROR: Failed to authorize user. Ensure username and/or password is correct."
Now I am assuming that it's the same user name and password I used to download and install the SWAssistant but I could be wrong. What am I missing, what hoop did I miss. And here I though svr2008 was a hoot.
Please use plain text.
Honored Contributor
Steven Schweda
Posts: 9,079
Registered: ‎02-23-2005
Message 11 of 11 (732 Views)

Re: The new HP restrictions for patch access

> [...] It failed [...]

If you have an actual problem of your own,
then you should probably start your own
thread to deal with it. (There are people
for whom these forum points are a
life-and-death matter, and you can't assign
them in someone else's thread. This could
cost you a useful response, believe it or
not. Luckily, as a non-paying parasite/peon,
I have no patch access now, so I can't do
much useful experimentation on this topic.)
Please use plain text.
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of HP. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation