> Who said it was our board? Who said it was anyone inside our company?
Well, I remembered reading it somewhere so I went back to find it (took me a while). Turns out it was under the rumor section! I apologize for assuming the rumor was true (just goes to show you the damage rumors can do). Here's the link just so you know I wasn't crazy: http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_Story.asp?ID=840 Here's the rumored text: "upon going public, Palm had to agree to the new board's demand that they not give OS updates away." But still - no matter who really made the decision, I think it was a bad one. Just go check the message boards and see the damage it has already done. Especially since people - whether rightfully or not - felt that a free update was promised to them back in February. People are also accustomed to "flash" upgrades being free, whether they are BIOS updates for a PC or OS updates for their Palms. The mentality is that if the upgrade isn't packaged, isn't marketed as a "new" OS, and wasn't bought in a store, then it should be free. Going from OS version 3.1 to 3.5 seems like a minor update - not something that should have to be paid for. I'm not saying any of this is valid thought, just my observations of how people think. Maybe you should start naming your OS's by the year? Haha - j/k. -Sean David Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> And as for having to pay for it - the cost is very > >> minimal, and let's just say we weren't the ones who wanted to have to > >> charge for it :-( > > > >I think that was a very, very BAD move on part of your board of directors. > > > Who said it was our board? Who said it was anyone inside our company? > > Yes, the truth is stranger than corporate insanity... > > -David Fedor > Palm Developer Support > > -- For information on using the ACCESS Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.access-company.com/developers/forums/
