Obviously I “never bought Xojo”.
It’s not as if I’m talking about an old elapsed licence.
Like using Photoshop 5 to get an upgrade to the latest Creative Suite.
I’m talking about having bought a licence including all updates for the next four years.
I’m talking about having a currently active licence.
A licence which is treated differently from other licences.
It would be ok if Xojo had stated at the point of sale that “this licence cannot be used like other licences”.
But they didn’t.
It was a bog standard licence.
So let’s be frank here: it is a case of “seller’s remorse”.
They made special offers. I took up the offer. Now they regret that they sold the licence cheaply, and want to get some of the money “back” that I so obviously “owe” them.
A bit reminiscent of the companies that “pay too little tax” because they follow the law.
Of cause those companies could simply pay more tax than the law decrees them to.
I could of cause simply have paid more than Xojo asked for.
But then I would be stupid.
No, instead Xojo decrees that my licence is different.
Why? And this is the goody: Because I “never bought Xojo”
So let’s summarize that:
I take up a special offer and buy a multi-year licence of REALstudio
They rename it to Xojo
They treat my licence differently because “you never bought Xojo”
For me that behaviour is highly unethical.
Theoretical question: what if they rename it tomorrow to Suckeroo and declare that as a new product for which you need a new licence? Never mind that your license is running for another 2 years?
Most interesting though is the reaction of the community to this.
I would have thought a logical response would be “an active licence is an active licence and should not be treated differently because of when or where it was bought”
There were two who reacted like that.
But for the vast majority it’s either attacks against me as if I would be asking for special treatment. Which I’m not.
Or a “finger in the ear la la la” aka “rice”.
It’s an interesting but well known psychological reaction.
Pretty much the other side of “fodder envy”.
“I paid this much so others should pay at least as much too, and if they don’t then I’m against them getting the same rights as me”
I can really feel the community spirit.
So, am I stupid for asking that my current and active licence is being treated like other current active licences?
According to you guys: yes.
Btw, if the community doesn’t want to hear this then just answer with the word “rice” and I’m happy to take it elsewhere.