Dave,
I agree, the product is definitely continuing to evolve and they are
pretty good at doing a lot of things, but they aren't good at handling
support issues, especially from power users with an eye for detail.
They didn't get the issues with auth-only port 587 until that exploded
on this list despite repeated requests on their own message board and
the fact that this was not only useful for shutting off unauthenticated
access to a server, but also the standard way of implementing the
submission port.
I think this comes from the fact that they have a lot of control panel
hosting customers using their software, and those users are typically
not tweakers like we are. I don't think that there is a lot of interest
on their part in getting direction from the community as a result of the
general dynamic. I have seen a lot of short-sighted/impractical feature
requests from users on their message list, yet I'm sure that those
requesting such things feel that their requests are just as important as
ours. It's likely hard for them to differentiate, or maybe because of
the typical issues that they see are more on the side of the user that
they don't tend to think so deeply about this stuff. It sound like they
really didn't understand the nature of this bug and assumed it was a
user error, or didn't bother to read deeply enough into the unintended
affects.
What you and Gary have done however seems like the best way to approach
it. Sort of like yelling to get attention, but yelling detail and being
persistent instead of just getting angry and spouting obscenities. I
would understand them not fixing it immediately if it is complicated for
them to do so, which it may be, but I wouldn't understand a conscious
decision to leave things as is indefinitely.
Matt
Dave Doherty wrote:
I have had similar experiences with them right back to the beginning.
I think the quality of the service you get varies greatly with the
individual. If they "get it" the response is usually pretty good. It
does not always seem easy to get them to "get it" though...
I held off deploying SM in my plant for over a year because I wanted
to see how the product would evolve. I was - and remain - very
impressed with V3 overall. Every complicated product is going to have
some issues, the real issue is how they respond when the product meets
the users abnd the trouble tickets start flying.
I just submitted a detailed ticket with screenshots and a good
explanation as to why I think this is a major issue.
It will be very interesting to see what kind of response I get.
-Dave Doherty
Skywaves, Inc.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Steiner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding
Matt,
I tried all that...
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.
