On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Gene Wirchenko<[email protected]> wrote: > Did we say forever? It has not really been > that long. I just recently was modifying some > VFP procedures that I had not changed in just > over ten years. Ten years really is not that long. ------------
Ten years in tech time is a very very long time. Ten years in geologic time is infinitesimally small. We are talking Tech here right? > Excuse me, but I think that communism is > obsolete. Since you are embracing change so > tightly, you really should use a different > paradigm. Or join us. If not, please do not use > terrorists; that one is passé, too, and rather overdone. -------------------------- Who the F said I was embracing change? What I am writing about is the fact that as professional programmers many here find it distasteful when the #1 vendor introduces an upgrade to an existing product. If you were a professional you would determine if that might impact your product(s). If it does you then decide if you are going to adapt or not. To the contrary I find many on this list just piss and whine about the changes. Why do you not see this as a perfect REASON to contact former clients and tell them that everything is fine with the old SW you made for them, and is there anything else I can do for you? Or you can bring up the fact that the mail merge or the saving in a .dbf is no longer supported in the new version. You customer have two options now. Don't upgrade the Office version or let's talk about a change to your software when you do in the future. M$ in this case is opening up door for communication for you. Why is your first remark "Close that door! Were you raised in a barn?" > Microsoft breaks our code, and you are OK with that? ----------------------- I find it a PITA to test. I then realize that a customer from 2002 may need something else but I have not called them, because they should call me. >>Would you guess those maintenance fees companies charge are to go >>against testing these new products instead of just to your pocket? > > Possibly. Now, let us ask what the benefit > is of the new software. It is possible that it > is none or insufficient for the expense. Finance > types have a concept called return on investment. --------------------------------- I found that Office 2007 was a tremendous update for a few little things that I did. Taking spreadsheets and saving them as xml files so I could import them into web apps. I liked how the ribbon kept all the choices for an area visible instead of having to dig through a menu to get to them. Outlook had a much better presentation of demands then 2003. > As a professional, I feel an obligation to not drink the Kool-Aid. ---------------------- hahahahaha I love the statements from the true consultant. I refuse to identify anything outside of my direct needs. The rest is futile. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer SQL Server DBA Web and Winform Development Independent Contractor Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
