> but you completely missed the point of his answer. There is NO point made here...unless u want you brief.
Joe Eugene > -----Original Message----- > From: Kwang Suh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:50 PM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: Re: The New Macromedia Website(ODBC) > > > 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 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
