16 Nov
2011
16 Nov
'11
6:16 p.m.
On 16/11/11 3:30 PM, Mouse wrote:
Well said. And those of us who use expensive, proprietary software can
easily feel victimised by it. (In my case, in a previous career, Adobe.)
The "support" which is supposedly the privilege of paying through the
nose and enduring lock-in - frequently just isn't really there. When was
the last time a Windows user followed a bug through Microsoft's support
system? Mostly they get endured and worked around.
That's just things get done, in Proprietary Land... unless, I suppose,
you are Fortune 100 and can use a red telephone.
--T
Expecting
these tools to somehow work magic and be 100% bug free is
an unrealistic expectation and most people who expect this are
drastically underestimating the complexity of tools involved.
I don't expect any software to be bug-free.
However, when they not only don't document enough for users to inspect
and/or construct config bitblobs on their own but threaten "trouble"
for those who try to deduce that information, their tools - quite aside
from the problems inherent in running them at all - must be considered
part of their product, with similar perfection requirements; bugs in
those tools are just as crippling as bugs in the hardware, under those
circumstances.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B