Mr. Watts can defend himself, but you completely missed the point of his answer.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:52 PM Subject: RE: The New Macromedia Website(ODBC) > > So, you're saying that if there's ANY bug at all in CFMX, it > > shouldn't have > > been released > > I am NOT saying "ANY".. software is not perfect!. We are not talking > about one specific issue... CFMX has had numerous issues... > (Check Updater Docs... if you want to start counting them) > > > My solution is to find the best way to solve a problem. If > > JDBC-ODBC doesn't > > work well in CFMX, but "pure" JDBC does, my solution may well be to > > recommend "pure" JDBC. > > Yes.. JDBC is a Solution/Alternative.. Not a fix to the software(cfmx) BUG. > > Example...CFMX had COM Issues...am not sure where it stands now... > Any COM functionality can be replicated very well through a Java Bean.. > So in your theory...Instead of MM fixing COM issues... you probably > will ask all your developers to re-write every COM in a Java Bean? > > You have really have interesting theories. > > Joe Eugene > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 6:11 PM > > To: CF-Talk > > Subject: RE: The New Macromedia Website(ODBC) > > > > > > > > It's another thing to say that the product shouldn't have > > > > been released because of it. > > > > > > It might be your nature to release "BUG"/GY applications... > > > I Dont operate that way. > > > > So, you're saying that if there's ANY bug at all in CFMX, it > > shouldn't have > > been released? I'd still be waiting for my bug-free copy of CF 2 then! And > > how about my Windows NT 3.51 fixes - I'm still waiting! It's simply not > > practical to expect any software package of any complexity to have no bugs > > at all. > > > > > > Most bugs aren't trivial to the people who run into them > > > > > > Apparently its Trivial to most developers here...If something > > > doesnt work.. My solution is to get it fixed... Yours might > > > be to improve Product Manuals and perhaps buy the User Big > > > Eye Glasses... not a bad Strategy!. > > > > My solution is to find the best way to solve a problem. If > > JDBC-ODBC doesn't > > work well in CFMX, but "pure" JDBC does, my solution may well be to > > recommend "pure" JDBC. If there's some reason that's not acceptable, then > > that's a different matter. But I try to keep my expectations realistic. > > > > Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software > > http://www.figleaf.com/ > > voice: (202) 797-5496 > > fax: (202) 797-5444 > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
