🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct27.135607.3505@splunge.uucp> royce@splunge.uucp (Royce Howland) writes:
>roettig@ifi.unizh.ch (Thomas Roettig) writes:
>
>>Are you shure about the last statement? I did try ask_next@next.com for a  
>>question concerning a bug (I can not access a large number of fonts since  
>>upgrading to NS 3.0 and all the workarounds from the net did not help).
>>Guess what kind a answer I got from NeXT? 
>
>My understanding also is that NeXT will not charge for bug-related
>assistance.  Perhaps one of the kind NeXT souls will see this thread
>and forever (nah, more like "temporarily") end the debate with a few
>facts.  :~)


NeXT *will not* charge you for a question that ends up having a bug as
it's cause.

IT's just that you have to make the gamble: "Is this a bug, or am I
doing something wrong?" If you lose, then it costs you $225, if you
win you're screwed because you have to wait for 3.1 :-).

And with 3.0, you never know what works and what doesn't.

- db

>-- 
>Royce Howland, DKW Systems Corp.   |  "And since OS/2 2.0 is a 32-bit
>       Everything is IMHO          |   operating system, programs are easier
>royce@splunge.uucp  (NeXTMail OK)  |   to write and run faster, too."
>or kakwa!atlantis!splunge!royce    |  ad for OS/2 2.0