[DUG] A change in upgrade policy coming from Embarcadero

[Kyley Harris]

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.norman at 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 <jsmith at 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-bounces at delphi.org.nz [mailto:delphi-bounces at 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 <kyleyharris at 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 at delphi.org.nz
>> Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
>> Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-request at delphi.org.nz with Subject:
>> unsubscribe
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NZ Borland Developers Group - Delphi mailing list
> Post: delphi at delphi.org.nz
> Admin: http://delphi.org.nz/mailman/listinfo/delphi
> Unsubscribe: send an email to delphi-request at delphi.org.nz with Subject:
> unsubscribe
>



-- 
Kyley Harris
Harris Software
+64-21-671-821
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.123.net.nz/pipermail/delphi/attachments/20090919/edbdd493/attachment-0001.html