Hey, Chilton! I haven't seen you on this list; I guess you're just lurking, eh? ;-)
> I believe it's a difference in the demands of the users. > Because SC has > been around so long, if SC4 shipped with *any* major bugs, it > would be > seen a major failure on the part of the SuperCard team, so the > development cycle for this version was considerably longer > than I think > anyone hoped it would be. But the finished product was worth the wait. Since nothing had been heard from SC in the public arena after Allegiant's demise (if I remember correctly), it was also very important for media coverage that the next major upgrade be pretty bug free. This is most likely why Rev 2.0 has been taking so long as well; 1.1.1 was the last version to be covered in the media, and knowing that 2.0 is a next major upgrade, it is important to make sure all the major bugs are squashed. > SC's installed user base is not as tolerant of the development team's > mistakes as users are on this list. That's what I like about the users on this list; they are more forgiving than most. I know dozens of SC users who "jumped ship" earlier than I would have expected in the early 3.x days because of Allegiant's failed Windows promises... I was working for Allegiant at the time, so I had first hand experience. Of course, this was the marketing team and not the development team, so I guess it's a bit different... Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
