Hi Mary, >> ... doesn't leave much that is working at all, does it? MB> Different strokes for different folks. I do have to disagree with your MB> conclusion, while conceding the validity of your complaints.
Almost every component of the program that was fiddled with for v3.5 now shows malfunctions either everywhere or just on some systems, even when it had been working perfectly in v3.01. Not one component was actually improved. MB> And in one aspect alone my experience has been completely different >>from yours: I have always received prompt attention from RitLabs, MB> whether in customer service, Bug Track, or TBBETA. Just look at this list: In the last few months, I have received one single mail from someone at RIT (Marek). This was a one-line inquiry about the crashs I mentioned lately and has not seen a second message from RIT after I described the issue at length. I don't expect an answer from RIT to emails in which I accuse them of amateurism and incompetency in their development procedures, even if in my opinion one would be warranted nevertheless. But you have to keep in mind that I didn't start out this way, that this was a learning process on my side that lasted years. Until the bubble broke with the delivery of the scandalous v3.5 and I started to - well, "express myself", I had not gotten any reaction from RIT on anything at all for years. Not on questions, not on bug reports, not on suggestions. RIT apears to me like a few students who have landed a chance surprise success with one program they "just threw together", built a company around it and started to sell it. When they tried to update the program they recognized that the architecture wasn't updatable. Still they tried, unsuccessfully as is evident, and delayed the necessary rewrites until they only were the very last resort. During all that time, never having learned "the business" other than by doing, they didn't know how to handle the large customer base that had fallen on them so unexpectedly. They simply didn't (and still don't) know the most basic rules of customer management: 1.) React. Customers are vain, they want to see that they are being heard. 2.) If you won't or can't implement what the customers want right now, explain to them why this is the case and when you'll do it. Explain it once, twice, however often they ask. Make them understand, not feel ignored. Aparently RIT has never heard of these two "ironest of iron rules". _THAT_ is the issue here. If they had accorded to this, I might still be unsatisfied with v3.5, but I wouldn't be steaming with anger and straightout calling v3.5 a piece of junk. I also would still have a somewhat decent opinion of the developers, contrary to - well. Go figure. -- MfG, Alto mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpi5WetToh9p.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________________ Current beta is (none) | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
