I dont remember that Paul, but I'm guessing it didn't work.. because I am not paying yet.
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Paul A Norman <paul.a.nor...@gmail.com>wrote: > Richard, > > Do you rmemeber when Microsoft wanted to charge for "upgrades" that were > fixes and what happened? > > Paul > > > > > 2009/9/19 Jolyon Smith <jsm...@deltics.co.nz> > >> Even Microsoft think it’s worth issuing fixes and indeed updates LONG >> after 18 months has passed. >> >> >> >> Barely a day goes by without some Windows update or other shoehorning >> itself into my XP system that Microsoft last got my money for almost 10 >> years ago. >> >> >> >> And I can only hope that you were being funny in that passage about “low >> quality requirements” not being bugs. >> >> >> >> >> >> I cannot think of any other product for which I am asked to pay the sorts >> of $$’s I am asked to pay for software that would come with a complete >> denial of liability should it turn out to be partly or entirely unfit for >> purpose or actually cause me loss or harm. >> >> >> >> Actually, I can think of one product where the customers are treated with >> disdain equal to that of the software industry .... and interestingly it’s >> the only other industry where the customer is referred to as a “user” by >> their “dealer”. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-boun...@delphi.org.nz] >> *On Behalf Of *Richard Vowles >> *Sent:* Saturday, 19 September 2009 15:49 >> *To:* NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi List >> *Subject:* Re: [DUG] A change in upgrade policy coming from Embarcadero >> >> >> >> Comparing software development to plumbing is a road to madness, surely? >> Thats almost certainly like saying software development is an engineering >> discipline, which it has clearly been disproved from being. >> >> >> Delphi consists, last I heard, of 26000 different source files - to expect >> that entire tree to be "bug free" is questionable in the least. Besides, a >> bug is defined as being something that does not meet the requirements. Given >> Delphi's "set of requirements" for shipping is determined at the point of >> shipping, technically it meets those requirements and thus has no bugs. All >> subsequent "patches" are, technically, not bug fixes but requirements >> changes. As the quality of requirements set by Borland were clearly much >> lower than people would generally consider acceptable (for Delphi 2005, and >> most certainly for Delphi 8), that is really a mismatch in requirements >> expectations. Remember, we are talking *Borland* here, not *Embarcadero*. >> Embarcadero, I think, has a pretty good track record, and a much higher bar. >> But even E have "feature defects" they consider acceptable when shipping. >> Everyone does. >> >> As an interesting aside, Support and Maintenance on Delphi (and all IDEs >> from Borland and I am assuming from E but I haven't closely looked at the >> T's&C's) *specifically exclude* bug fixes. Included are new versions and >> workarounds (if possible). S&M is also only provided two versions earlier >> from the current version (from memory) meaning even D2006 is excluded from >> the attempts for workarounds. >> >> I'm sorry, but I would not commit to writing an application and then >> fixing any things its users considered bugs gratis for eternity. I would >> consider it reasonable for 3 months as long as it was agreed to in the >> original payment schedule, but I would *certainly* not expect it after 18 >> months. In the case of a development tool, with the importance of supporting >> technology, I would expect new releases every 18 months and would be >> concerned if I did not see new releases coming out from the vendor. >> >> Richard >> >> 2009/9/19 Kyley Harris <kyleyhar...@gmail.com> >> >> Paul. I agree 100% a professional software company, E, should not charge >> 1cent to license holders for genuine bug fixes and should package free >> releases independantly of feature releases until they are fixed. Otherwise >> they are not professional anything >> >> >> >> When I pay my plumber to fix a leak. I don't expect to have to pay him to >> fix the new secondary leaks he caused by being a bad plumber >> >> >> -- >> --- >> Richard Vowles, Technical Advisor >> Developers Inc Ltd >> web. http://www.developers-inc.co.nz >> ph. +64-9-3600231, mob. +64-275-467747, fax. +64-9-3600384 >> skype. rvowles, LinkedIn, Twitter >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list >> Post: delphi@delphi.org.nz >> Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi >> Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-requ...@delphi.org.nz with Subject: >> unsubscribe >> > > > _______________________________________________ > NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list > Post: delphi@delphi.org.nz > Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi > Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-requ...@delphi.org.nz with Subject: > unsubscribe > -- Kyley Harris Harris Software +64-21-671-821
_______________________________________________ NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list Post: delphi@delphi.org.nz Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-requ...@delphi.org.nz with Subject: unsubscribe
