The Upgrade Request

[gordo]

 

[Possumgal]

Sorry, you'll just have to buy the new version and see if we fixed it in that one.

 

[kdw75]

Software companies need to spend as much time fixing bugs, as they do adding every feature under the sun. It's like stacking more and more blocks on a dodgy foundation. Not a good idea.

 

[gordo]

Software companies need to spend as much time fixing bugs, as they do adding every feature under the sun. It's like stacking more and more blocks on a dodgy foundation. Not a good idea.

Maybe the "bugs" are just undocumented features.

 

[toronar]

Software companies need to spend as much time fixing bugs, as they do adding every feature under the sun. It's like stacking more and more blocks on a dodgy foundation. Not a good idea.

There exists an interesting thing software companies do:
"To make feature X work as intended we would have to re-do our foundation, so we cannot do that."
And this is how half-assed features begin to exist and creep into software until it is rewritten from scratch. To be fair, most "must have features" only come up long after the initial planning.

Or a software company pulls this off (names have not been changed to shame the guilty):
Customer: if I check option X, it does not change/work
Heidelberg support: you are right, the check box does nothing
Next update of this software comes along ... the check box for this option no longer exists. Problem solved!

 

[MailGuru]

It has been said (and, I hate to admit it, because I'm a programmer): "If builders built buildings, the way programmers write programs, the first big wind that came along would utterly destroy all of civilization" LOL

-MailGuru

 

[Joe]

Bugs are their cash cow. If they fixed everything you would never buy the next version (or subscribe to their ripoff subscription plan). That can't be allowed to happen can it Adobe?

 

[David Milisock]

From my experience with testing and forums users can sometimes push application publishers to provide features that we (when first released) would be better off without. Example the early days of transparency in vector applications, I said BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR. Well we all see how that went and how long it took to get it close to right, and now I'm seeing users who have picked up low end non-color managed applications. The user wants true compliant applications to produce features in the true graphics application that exist in the low rent product. It's certainly easier to program when the output doesn't have to really work, but creating effects that work costs more than $175. So we see sometimes where the pressure come from. Just to bitch a $5,000 color profile creation application should not have bugs! RIGHT!

 

[MJNC]

Maybe the "bugs" are just undocumented features.

Anybody remember Aldus?