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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,88b676af04f3073d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: matthew_heaney@acm.org (Matthew Heaney) Subject: Re: Ada generics are bad Date: 1998/04/14 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 344152659 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit References: <6gm6jc$fbp@newshub.atmnet.net> <6gs5qa$s46@newshub.atmnet.net> <3533d2b3.81874922@news.mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Organization: Network Intensive Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-04-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <3533d2b3.81874922@news.mindspring.com>, munck@acm.org wrote: >Nonsense. You fix a "broken" feature so that it works the way >you want it to, and then the developer comes out with a new >release in which that feature either stays the way it was or >is changed to work a different way. Now what do you do? "Fix" >it again? Change all of you existing documents that use that >feature of the app? Either way, you end up spending all of >your time fixing all of your application packages. Not necessarily. I could send the fix to the original developer, and then (hopefully) he'll incorporate it into the next release. (That will be completed within hours or days.) >If you think that it's changing in the direction of increased >release of source code by developing companies, you're living >in a software dreamworld. Then at least provide decent customer support. If there's a problem with the software, and I tell you about it, then how about repairing the software and sending me the repaired version? I'm not saying I'm unwilling to pay for software. I am and I do. I even pay my shareware fees! It's just that if there's a problem, and I don't have the source, then I'm pretty much powerless to do anything about it. With my car, if there's a problem with my carburetor, I can go to my local parts store and buy a new carburetor. I can even drive the car to the dealer, and get it fixed on the spot. Why shouldn't software be the same way? Why do we even call it _soft_ware anyway, if repairs and enhancements take so long? Why does software come with a disclaimer, instead of a warranty? I guess what I'm really asking for is better customer service. When there's a problem, my desire is that I get a fixed version within a few hours of my letting you know about it. I'm not even asking for enhancements - just that the errors get repaired. In the end we're all in the "needs satisfaction" business. If my needs as a consumer of software are satisfied by the vendor, without him releasing the source, then so be it. But this is frequently not the case.