So, the post about SolidWorks enforcing their long-standing policy of only granting service packs to the entitled on Subscription Service got some mild interest, boosted antacid sales and Devon’s Blog even interviewed the VP of Customer Services at SolidWorks, Rich Welch, about the matter.
I could pick apart the interview notes Devon took, but I’d bore myself to spasms. I could point at commercial seats sold and revenue numbers, lick my finger, point it and a raised eyebrow to the easterly winds of Concord and say confidently, if SolidWorks offered free service packs, we would sup at the dinner table and eat bon-bons off each others knuckles.
Instead, I’ll take a deep and serious look at the words Rich stated and reveal the gooey center of underlying truths deep within. He responded to a question about separating bug fixes, service packs, and enhancements. Here’s what he wanted to say, or at the very least should have said…
SolidWorks has looked at this issue [spraying gravy at yaks] several times and determined that based upon the amount of effort [speckle-throated yak babies], Quality Assurance infrastructure, and the extreme high cost of [anti-nipple chaffing] implementation, it would ultimately result in higher fees to customers with the potential to introduce instability [rabid yak venom] in the software and require more service pack releases [enemas.] This is the opposite of what we are trying to accomplish [, except the enemas.] Based on that, there will be no significant change to the existing SolidWorks Subscription Maintenance [Yak milking] policy except to continue to focus on higher quality [herbed chicken,] services and software at the same low price point. He went on to say that [he will club a baby seal to make you a better deal and] this is not the decision of one person, but is discussed among many at SolidWorks [through dance competitions.]
[Devon] Here is the rest of the information that Rich shared with me;
He stated that the letter posted on the [super awesome, radical, badical] SolidSmack blog was a first draft internal [bleeding] document that should not have been posted [have been sung in two-part harmonies] and as noted by several people on the blog, that this [sic] is not a change to the existing [underwear] policy, which has been in [a very moist] place for many years. He said this is a soft rollout of a new [neo-fascist] mechanism to protect the investment and partnership of the vast majority of customers that are currently on subscription…
Ohhhh, that last one wasn’t so light-hearted, was it? I’ll stop there, least I get mean emails from mis-represented and mildly oppressed yak farmers.
Here’s the last thing I’ll say on the topic, which should be part of any software company’s purpose statement… Make the value you add separate from the value you create.
Font used… Criticized (free here)