I totally concur. I don't even mind helping once or twice somebody with older software, but not when it becomes a continuous thing.
---marlyse -------------------------former message(s) quotes:------------------------- >>>Honestly, if you do and no update has fixed it >>>to your satisfaction, move on to another client that does. >>This comment take the price. Most people on software discussion lists >>take a common interest in identifying problems with the software being >>discussed so that workarounds can be established and spread in the user >>comunity and the maker can be informed how to reproduce the problem and >>get rid of it in the next incremental update. > >Of course that only helps if the users actually upgrade their software to >the current version. > >Mikael, I think the primary reason why you're running into a bit of >resistance on this mailing list (and I see it's not only from me) is >because you're flooding the group with problems related to a version of >the software that I would guess perhaps one in ten, or even less, of the >people here are still using. Perhaps I'm wrong. But what I can say in >my case is yes, we'd love to help you, but in many cases, we're talking >about different programs. > >People like myself who are using the latest version (and again I would >estimate that's the vast majority of the people who read this list) have >little incentive to try to help you because we cannot, as we're using >different software. CTM probably has little incentive to help you as >well because spending time studying bugs in a version of the software >that's not even sold anymore wastes their time, and may even hurt sales, >because it would give you a disincentive to finally upgrade (if the old >version worked great). > >The other factor that comes into play for me is that for the most part, >PM works great for me. I've been using it for about 15 months now. Yes, >it crashes once in a while when indexing. And I got the LADY error once >(easily fixed), but I've never had all of those other crazy errors that >yourself and others sometimes report, so one tends to assume the problem >is either with your mail server, OS configuration, or some other thing >not directly related to PM. Of course, I realize that's not always the >case, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who tends to turn a deaf ear when >people yell about how horrible PM is when I'm perfectly (well, almost >perfectly) satisfied with it. > >--- > >Scott T. Hards >President >HobbyLink Japan (www.hlj.com) > > > >
