From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,23963231b5359f74 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-12 14:50:56 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!skynet.be!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!grolier!newsfeed.planete.net!psinet-france!psiuk-f4!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: software suits, was Re: Long names are doom ? Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:28:17 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9g61hj$35f$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3b24dc21$1@news.tce.com> <9g33oo$rp$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3b267365$1@news.tce.com> <3B267A3D.1B2F2750@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 136.170.200.133 X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 992381299 3247 136.170.200.133 (12 Jun 2001 21:28:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Jun 2001 21:28:19 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8635 comp.lang.java.programmer:75746 Date: 2001-06-12T21:28:19+00:00 List-Id: Exactly! When you go to buy a house or a used car labeled "as is", a court would likely rule that you had reasonable opportunity to inspect the house or car and look for flaws & hence could have and should have known what you were buying. (BTW: This also doesn't hold up across the board - there are exceptions - talk to a relator about "disclosure" and how that still may not get you out of all troubles!) When you buy a piece of software at CompUSA, all you can do there is read the stuff on the outside of the box - and maybe the user's manuals if you bust open the box (and doing so does not constitute acceptance.) You cannot inspect the actual product until you put it on your machine and go past the "I Accept" button. That "contract" doesn't even promise that the software inside will even start up and execute *at*all*. It could be an .EXE full of random zeros and ones and you have no way of knowing that until after you go past the "I Accept". Hence, you can't really know what you are agreeing to and no contract takes place. Naturally, no reputable firm would try to get money out of you for a file full of random zeros and ones - most would make a good faith effort to insure their product at least started up and got past the splash screan. Naturally, they're trying to avoid having someone hold them accountable for every conceivable little bug or glitch and insist that they fix it at potentially huge expense. They are also trying to avoid piracy. All of that is fair, but I still don't think that this should excuse a manufacturer of software from putting out really buggy crap when it is possible to make substantially more reliable software. I'd be satisfied if the warranty would list a set of functions and promise that those functions will work without flaws with the sole remedy being a refund of my money when I return the product. (This naturally gets difficult when the flaws may lie beneath your software in the OS or network or elsewhere... but still, it would be some sort of progress! Stipulating that the software can pass some set of tests without failure would be progress. Almost anything would be better than the "We promise you absolutely nothing!" claim of most licenses.) MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Wes Groleau" wrote in message news:3B267A3D.1B2F2750@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com... > Well, I am not saying this would hold up in court in ANY country, > but I HAVE SEEN packages which actually said, "If you do not agree > to the terms of the license inside this package, then do not open > the package." > > !!!! > > -- > Wes Groleau > http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau