Re: Special upgrade treatment

CWCunningham wrote:

> "Chuck Baker" <chuck_baker@newtek.com> wrote in message
> news:42CC4C9A.8000809@newtek.com...
> | Okay, my head is spinning on my shoulders, here.
> |
> | Excuse me, what technical support department are you talking to? I know
> | that ours is not saying any such thing regarding any of the updates,
> | let alone 8.3, let alone the notion of saying it about 50% of them.
> |
> Do you really want to go into this Chuck? 7.5b ..d ??? That makes up 50% of the
> 7.5 releases does it not ?

Your original comment did not suggest a specific range of releases.
Thank you for clarifying your intent. Yes, we withdrew one update in
that series. If technical support is recommending against any other
updates in that series or in any wider selected range of update
versions, then by all means I'd like to know about it, and I'd like to
know why. If you personally would recommend against any updates in that
series, or any other updates for that matter, then again, I am
interested in finding out why you feel those particular updates should
be avoided. If you'd prefer to discuss this in email, that would be
fine with me. This is certainly information that should get through to
management and the development team.

> Would you like to talk 8.3?

If you are encountering problems with 8.3 then indeed you should report
those problems. Whether you chose to do so here, or via our support
services, if you are having issues we'd like to help get them addressed.

> As for the free support being worth every penny, would you like to swap war
> stories?

Again, if you have issues with our support services, you have a choice
of either making mysterious innuendos or specific comments here, as you
wish, or you can always email me specifics and I'll direct your reports
to the management responsible for our support services.

--

===============================================
Chuck Baker -- NewTek, Inc.
Director of Corporate Communications
http://www.newtek.com/
===============================================

Could you please isolate in my original post, the line or lines which strike you
as "harsh comments", and then explain why you would think so? I'm sure after you
read it and mull it over for a few minutes, you'll see that it was as positive
as you might hope from a dissatisfied customer... even advertised the extension
to your very tempting upgrade offer.

"Chuck Baker" <chuck_baker@newtek.com> wrote in message
news:42D13672.1080802@newtek.com...
| CWCunningham wrote:
|
> 50% of the upgrades I've gotten from Newtek, *should not be installed*
> according
> to Newtek.
|| Your original comment did not suggest a specific range of releases.
| Thank you for clarifying your intent.
|
It was merely a statement of fact directed at someone else, but since you
question it, I'll gladly defend that statement.

First, instead of 50%, it should read 66.66% since 7.5 was not an upgrade, but a
$1500 event.
B as you know was pulled.
C was still not what I will call my money's worth.
And D, though still available on the website, is broken in a way that makes it
useless to myself and many others. If you search through this newsgroup, or
google "LW 7.5 D morph mixer problems - HELP", you will find a request to
confirm a bug in 7.5d, and your support department's "workaround", to wit, "...
they said flat out, 'do not run 7.5d'"


| Yes, we withdrew one update in
| that series. If technical support is recommending against any other
| updates in that series or in any wider selected range of update
| versions, then by all means I'd like to know about it, and I'd like to
| know why.
|
And there you have it.

| If you personally would recommend against any updates in that
| series, or any other updates for that matter, then again, I am
| interested in finding out why you feel those particular updates should
| be avoided. If you'd prefer to discuss this in email, that would be
| fine with me.
|
I think we should keep this very public. Newtek's attitude towards dissatisfied
customers, and the quality of LW releases is of public interest. I would have
appreciated this thread before I plonked down my hard earned cash, and I intend
to pay very close attention before I plonk down any more.

| This is certainly information that should get through to
| management and the development team.
|
I couldn't agree more, but now look at it from my perspective. The fact that
7.5d is unusable in the eyes of your support department is a matter of public
record in this newsgroup, and yet here you are, in the same newsgroup, focusing
on what ... harshness? If your company is unaware of what your support
department is telling customers, is that our responsibility? Who could possibly
turn this around? (My money's on you, and I hope I'm pushing you in that
direction).

Some time back, you and I had a discussion along these lines
YOU: "... do you think we should pull programmers off of new work to deal with
bug reports?"
ME: "No ... but let's not be too hasty"

Well today, I'm changing my tune, *Absolutely* you should pull programmers from
new content to deal with bugs, over the course of a year you would see unhappy
customers, and your bug backlog dry up. I guarantee it. During my decades in
programming, my policy has been to encourage bug reports to come to me directly
and immediately, and I've taken pride in turning them within the hour. 1 hour
doesn't even dent my ability to turn out new content, and my customers have
never been unhappy for more than an hour. It works miracles and you should try
it. ... if your developers have their trash put right on their desk until they
get it right ... they will get used to the customer friendly notion of getting
it right before it leaves, and doing it even better should it ever return.

If you have programmers who find releasable code a burden on their time, the
last thing you should do is give them new work ... do it well or don't bother
valuable customers with it.

| > Would you like to talk 8.3?
|
| If you are encountering problems with 8.3 then indeed you should report
| those problems. Whether you chose to do so here, or via our support
| services, if you are having issues we'd like to help get them addressed.
|
I'm not buying the 8.x releases, though the $250 offer did merit a "take it or
leave it" coin toss. Your own forums paint the picture vividly enough for my
tastes. I can't add to what you could easily learn from your own forums, but I
will add that an associate of Newtek's (who shall remain nameless) suggested
that I upgrade, but "don't install 8.3". I didn't do either. It would be
interesting to have a recent copy just so I could see if long standing flaws are
still extant, I'm certainly not going to pay for the privelege.

| > As for the free support being worth every penny, would you like to swap war
| > stories?
|
| Again, if you have issues with our support services, you have a choice
| of either making mysterious innuendos or specific comments here, as you
| wish, or you can always email me specifics and I'll direct your reports
| to the management responsible for our support services.
|
Mysterious Innuendos !!! Have you forgotten our discussions on this very subject
sometime back in this very newsgroup? You insisted that my 5 month old suppoprt
request was probably not recieved and that I should resubmit? I did so, cc'ing
you. I recieved a response from, *not* my resubmission, but my 5 month old
request. I saw to it you were cc'd the entire sequence of mailings that ensued,
did I recieve anything you would call helpful? I gave them an explicit error
message, but that was not enough to submit to a programmer!!! (Give me your code
and 5 minutes and I'll show you the code that generated the error).

But hey ... if you are really willing to help ... I've got an issue outstanding
with your support department that I'm still hoping will be resolved. It's 25
months old, will you help me?

As you can see, I'm not a satisfied customer, which is sad, because I'm easily
satisfied. I merely expect 7.5 to work as documented, that's what I paid for and
that's all I ask. I understand that bugs are inevitable, but I also know from
experience that they are easily dealt with. It's up to you.

--
CWC
============================
It's not that nice guys finish last,
They have a whole different notion
where the finish line is.
============================

I think most people would consider "Looks like an expensive mailing ...
kinda dumb to send it out
too late. " as a tad harsh, allied to a rather sarcastic and condescending
tone across the post (my interpretation). I'm sure that Chuck is too much of
a gentleman and too experienced in PR circles to be drawn out by your
request.

Paul

"CWCunningham" <charlesw-at-blackfoot.net> wrote in message
news:davafr01nle@enews2.newsguy.com...
> Could you please isolate in my original post, the line or lines which
strike you
> as "harsh comments", and then explain why you would think so? I'm sure
after you
> read it and mull it over for a few minutes, you'll see that it was as
positive
> as you might hope from a dissatisfied customer... even advertised the
extension
> to your very tempting upgrade offer.
>
> "Chuck Baker" <chuck_baker@newtek.com> wrote in message
> news:42D13672.1080802@newtek.com...
> | CWCunningham wrote:
> |
> > 50% of the upgrades I've gotten from Newtek, *should not be installed*
> > according
> > to Newtek.
> || Your original comment did not suggest a specific range of releases.
> | Thank you for clarifying your intent.
> |
> It was merely a statement of fact directed at someone else, but since you
> question it, I'll gladly defend that statement.
>
> First, instead of 50%, it should read 66.66% since 7.5 was not an upgrade,
but a
> $1500 event.
> B as you know was pulled.
> C was still not what I will call my money's worth.
> And D, though still available on the website, is broken in a way that
makes it
> useless to myself and many others. If you search through this newsgroup,
or
> google "LW 7.5 D morph mixer problems - HELP", you will find a request to
> confirm a bug in 7.5d, and your support department's "workaround", to wit,
"...
> they said flat out, 'do not run 7.5d'"
>
>
> | Yes, we withdrew one update in
> | that series. If technical support is recommending against any other
> | updates in that series or in any wider selected range of update
> | versions, then by all means I'd like to know about it, and I'd like to
> | know why.
> |
> And there you have it.
>
> | If you personally would recommend against any updates in that
> | series, or any other updates for that matter, then again, I am
> | interested in finding out why you feel those particular updates should
> | be avoided. If you'd prefer to discuss this in email, that would be
> | fine with me.
> |
> I think we should keep this very public. Newtek's attitude towards
dissatisfied
> customers, and the quality of LW releases is of public interest. I would
have
> appreciated this thread before I plonked down my hard earned cash, and I
intend
> to pay very close attention before I plonk down any more.
>
> | This is certainly information that should get through to
> | management and the development team.
> |
> I couldn't agree more, but now look at it from my perspective. The fact
that
> 7.5d is unusable in the eyes of your support department is a matter of
public
> record in this newsgroup, and yet here you are, in the same newsgroup,
focusing
> on what ... harshness? If your company is unaware of what your support
> department is telling customers, is that our responsibility? Who could
possibly
> turn this around? (My money's on you, and I hope I'm pushing you in that
> direction).
>
> Some time back, you and I had a discussion along these lines
> YOU: "... do you think we should pull programmers off of new work to deal
with
> bug reports?"
> ME: "No ... but let's not be too hasty"
>
> Well today, I'm changing my tune, *Absolutely* you should pull programmers
from
> new content to deal with bugs, over the course of a year you would see
unhappy
> customers, and your bug backlog dry up. I guarantee it. During my decades
in
> programming, my policy has been to encourage bug reports to come to me
directly
> and immediately, and I've taken pride in turning them within the hour. 1
hour
> doesn't even dent my ability to turn out new content, and my customers
have
> never been unhappy for more than an hour. It works miracles and you should
try
> it. ... if your developers have their trash put right on their desk until
they
> get it right ... they will get used to the customer friendly notion of
getting
> it right before it leaves, and doing it even better should it ever return.
>
> If you have programmers who find releasable code a burden on their time,
the
> last thing you should do is give them new work ... do it well or don't
bother
> valuable customers with it.
>
> | > Would you like to talk 8.3?
> |
> | If you are encountering problems with 8.3 then indeed you should report
> | those problems. Whether you chose to do so here, or via our support
> | services, if you are having issues we'd like to help get them addressed.
> |
> I'm not buying the 8.x releases, though the $250 offer did merit a "take
it or
> leave it" coin toss. Your own forums paint the picture vividly enough for
my
> tastes. I can't add to what you could easily learn from your own forums,
but I
> will add that an associate of Newtek's (who shall remain nameless)
suggested
> that I upgrade, but "don't install 8.3". I didn't do either. It would be
> interesting to have a recent copy just so I could see if long standing
flaws are
> still extant, I'm certainly not going to pay for the privelege.
>
> | > As for the free support being worth every penny, would you like to
swap war
> | > stories?
> |
> | Again, if you have issues with our support services, you have a choice
> | of either making mysterious innuendos or specific comments here, as you
> | wish, or you can always email me specifics and I'll direct your reports
> | to the management responsible for our support services.
> |
> Mysterious Innuendos !!! Have you forgotten our discussions on this very
subject
> sometime back in this very newsgroup? You insisted that my 5 month old
suppoprt
> request was probably not recieved and that I should resubmit? I did so,
cc'ing
> you. I recieved a response from, *not* my resubmission, but my 5 month old
> request. I saw to it you were cc'd the entire sequence of mailings that
ensued,
> did I recieve anything you would call helpful? I gave them an explicit
error
> message, but that was not enough to submit to a programmer!!! (Give me
your code
> and 5 minutes and I'll show you the code that generated the error).
>
> But hey ... if you are really willing to help ... I've got an issue
outstanding
> with your support department that I'm still hoping will be resolved. It's
25
> months old, will you help me?
>
> As you can see, I'm not a satisfied customer, which is sad, because I'm
easily
> satisfied. I merely expect 7.5 to work as documented, that's what I paid
for and
> that's all I ask. I understand that bugs are inevitable, but I also know
from
> experience that they are easily dealt with. It's up to you.
>
> --
> CWC
> ============================
> It's not that nice guys finish last,
> They have a whole different notion
> where the finish line is.
> ============================
>
>

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:38:40 -0600, "CWCunningham"
<charlesw-at-blackfoot.net> wrote:



>(7.5) C was still not what I will call my money's worth.

Call me an interloper, but what's wrong with 7.5c? I mean, sure, it
does have the well-known amount of bugs, but "not worth the money"
seems a tad excessive...

>And D, though still available on the website, is broken in a way that makes it
>useless to myself and many others.

That one was a mistake.

> During my decades in programming...
>and immediately, and I've taken pride in turning them within the hour. 1 hour
>doesn't even dent my ability to turn out new content, and my customers have
>never been unhappy for more than an hour.

I think there's absolutely nothing in LW that can be fixed in 1 hour.
As a seasoned programmer, you should know how it feels when you find a
bug in something that you haven't written, but that's actually been
written 2 years and 6 releases ago by someone who's now unavailable,
and that's been modified and tampered with by someone else 2 releases
ago, and so on and so forth. It's a nightmare.

I'm not saying we should be happy with bugs, of course, but after the
painfully long hiatus between 7.5 and 8, now Newtek does seem to be
trying - see the prompt 8.0->8.2 transition.

>I'm not buying the 8.x releases, though the $250 offer did merit a "take it or
>leave it" coin toss. Your own forums paint the picture vividly enough for my
>tastes.

I work in architecture and I couldn't find a single reason to get 8.0,
until Fprime 1.5 came out with that nifty "works a hell of a lot
faster in 8.2" feature that made me cough up the upgrade money at
once. It really depends on what you do, I guess...

ADP.

> I work in architecture and I couldn't find a single reason to get 8.0,
> until Fprime 1.5 came out with that nifty "works a hell of a lot
> faster in 8.2" feature that made me cough up the upgrade money at
> once. It really depends on what you do, I guess...

Is this proved ? Does FP 1.5 work really faster on 8.x than 7.5c ?
Is there any real benchmark out there ?

PS: a strong point on 7.5c is that Kray, the fast and pretty good photon
mapping engine, does not work on 8.x.
Dunno if it's Kray or 8.x fault, but hope it's fixed in next releases.

Paolo Zambrini

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 10:42:56 GMT, "Pavlov" <Mesmer@ismo.it> wrote:

>> I work in architecture and I couldn't find a single reason to get 8.0,
>> until Fprime 1.5 came out with that nifty "works a hell of a lot
>> faster in 8.2" feature that made me cough up the upgrade money at
>> once. It really depends on what you do, I guess...
>
>Is this proved ?

No.

> Does FP 1.5 work really faster on 8.x than 7.5c ?

No. But when it DID came out first that's what was being reported, and
it was exactly the kind of excuse I needed to upgrade. Oh well, at
least the new PSD exporter is pretty good and they added an amount of
useful stuff to modeler - nothing you couldn't get on Flay already,
but hey.

On a side note: have you tried LWCAD?

ADP.

"Alessandro D. Petaccia" <alexos@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:b507d15lgeodbpc7o6n9k23rh7290d7c35@4ax.com...
| On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:38:40 -0600, "CWCunningham"
| <charlesw-at-blackfoot.net> wrote:
|
| >(7.5) C was still not what I will call my money's worth.
| Call me an interloper, but what's wrong with 7.5c? I mean, sure, it
| does have the well-known amount of bugs, but "not worth the money"
| seems a tad excessive...
|
That's a reasonable question, but since I gave up on Newtek's customer support,
I no longer log issues, I just find different ways to get things done, and move
on. According to Newtek's website, C has "over 300 bugs" more than D. Though I'm
currently running a hybridized version of D, I actually spend more time
exploring alternatives to Lightwave. Whether something is "worth the money" is
subjective. When Chuck Baker says, "What's beig said about 8.3 by a good many
customers is that it is in fact the most stable version we've provided since
5.6.", I see I'm not alone in recognizing 7.5x as a mediocre series of releases.

|
| >And D, though still available on the website, is broken in a way that makes
it
| >useless to myself and many others.
|
| That one was a mistake.
|
| > During my decades in programming...
| >and immediately, and I've taken pride in turning them within the hour. 1 hour
| >doesn't even dent my ability to turn out new content, and my customers have
| >never been unhappy for more than an hour.
|
| I think there's absolutely nothing in LW that can be fixed in 1 hour.
|
You may be right, but if that's true, it's likely a big part of the problem.

| As a seasoned programmer, you should know how it feels when you find a
| bug in something that you haven't written, but that's actually been
| written 2 years and 6 releases ago by someone who's now unavailable,
| and that's been modified and tampered with by someone else 2 releases
| ago, and so on and so forth. It's a nightmare.
|
I hear what you're saying, but you should recognize that this isn't some rare
disease that bites few programming shops. Every company that produces production
quality code has to deal with these issues, and there are mechanisms that can be
adopted to alleviate much of this pain. For instance, my policy of fixing all
bugs immediately upon discovery makes it a rare case indeed that flaws are
discovered in 2 year old code. By the time a title is 2 months old, it's had a
number of maintenance releases and been certified bug free by 2 programmers, 2
designers, and 2 quality controllers. Any bugs discovered after that are
discovered by customers, and are dealt with immediately, and with the same
rigor. Chances are very high at this stage that no-one looks at the code again
until it's redesigned, and the process begins anew. Even ugly old code that's
fifteen years old can be a snap to work with if it's commented with the idea
that someone else may have to fix it someday. If it's too ugly to maintain, it
gets rewritten. These concepts are nothing new, and they're not always easy to
adopt, but customers eat it up and never go anywhere else.

| I'm not saying we should be happy with bugs, of course, but after the
| painfully long hiatus between 7.5 and 8, now Newtek does seem to be
| trying - see the prompt 8.0->8.2 transition.
|
I applaud Newtek's efforts, and my vocal dissappointment is not designed to tear
them down, but to inspire them to improve. They have the potential to become the
top dog in their market. They have a lot of loyal customers, and get many
compliments for their strengths. They probably don't appreciate people like me
who poke at their sore spots, but in a very real sense, my feedback is as
valuable as that of two cheerleaders. I look forward to the day when I can say
quite honestly that I'm a satisfied Newtek customer and recommend their product
wholeheartedly. If I didn't care, I wouldn't be here.

| >I'm not buying the 8.x releases, though the $250 offer did merit a "take it
or
| >leave it" coin toss. Your own forums paint the picture vividly enough for my
| >tastes.
|
| I work in architecture and I couldn't find a single reason to get 8.0,
| until Fprime 1.5 came out with that nifty "works a hell of a lot
| faster in 8.2" feature that made me cough up the upgrade money at
| once. It really depends on what you do, I guess...
|
I would have loved to take up that $250 offer, but I told Chuck I was skipping
8.x, and the coin toss helped me keep my word.

| ADP.

--
CWC
============================
It's not that nice guys finish last,
They have a whole different notion
where the finish line is.
============================

"Paul Andrews" <ac297@dial.pipex.commmmm> wrote in message
news:EFKAe.5745$f77.2461@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
|I think most people would consider "Looks like an expensive mailing ...
| kinda dumb to send it out
| too late. " as a tad harsh, allied to a rather sarcastic and condescending
| tone across the post (my interpretation). I'm sure that Chuck is too much of
| a gentleman and too experienced in PR circles to be drawn out by your
| request.
|
I suppose I could have said, "I wonder why they sent it out too late?", but I
admittedly chose a tad harsher way to say it. As for sarcasm or condescension,
you must be reading other posts in this thread.

--
CWC
============================
It's not that nice guys finish last,
They have a whole different notion
where the finish line is.
============================

>On a side note: have you tried LWCAD?

Nope, but it's on my to-buy list.
I just bought Kray, let me take sometime.
Ah.. Kray is AWESOME. Nobody involved in arch viz should live without, its
baker alone blows me away.
In a matter of hours i've a bunch of baked HDR textures containing a
24-bounces GI info.
Single movie frames have better quality than static imagery done in other
ways

Paolo

CWCunningham wrote:
> Could you please isolate in my original post, the line or lines which strike you
> as "harsh comments", and then explain why you would think so? I'm sure after you
> read it and mull it over for a few minutes, you'll see that it was as positive
> as you might hope from a dissatisfied customer... even advertised the extension
> to your very tempting upgrade offer.
>
> "Chuck Baker" <chuck_baker@newtek.com> wrote in message
> news:42D13672.1080802@newtek.com...
> | CWCunningham wrote:
> |
>
>>50% of the upgrades I've gotten from Newtek, *should not be installed*
>>according
>>to Newtek.
>
> || Your original comment did not suggest a specific range of releases.
> | Thank you for clarifying your intent.
> |
> It was merely a statement of fact directed at someone else, but since you
> question it, I'll gladly defend that statement.
>
> First, instead of 50%, it should read 66.66% since 7.5 was not an upgrade, but a
> $1500 event.
> B as you know was pulled.
> C was still not what I will call my money's worth.
> And D, though still available on the website, is broken in a way that makes it
> useless to myself and many others. If you search through this newsgroup, or
> google "LW 7.5 D morph mixer problems - HELP", you will find a request to
> confirm a bug in 7.5d, and your support department's "workaround", to wit, "...
> they said flat out, 'do not run 7.5d'"
>
>
> | Yes, we withdrew one update in
> | that series. If technical support is recommending against any other
> | updates in that series or in any wider selected range of update
> | versions, then by all means I'd like to know about it, and I'd like to
> | know why.
> |
> And there you have it.
>
> | If you personally would recommend against any updates in that
> | series, or any other updates for that matter, then again, I am
> | interested in finding out why you feel those particular updates should
> | be avoided. If you'd prefer to discuss this in email, that would be
> | fine with me.
> |
> I think we should keep this very public.

That was my preference, or I would have just emailed you, CW.

> Newtek's attitude towards dissatisfied
> customers, and the quality of LW releases is of public interest. I would have
> appreciated this thread before I plonked down my hard earned cash, and I intend
> to pay very close attention before I plonk down any more.
>
> | This is certainly information that should get through to
> | management and the development team.
> |
> I couldn't agree more, but now look at it from my perspective. The fact that
> 7.5d is unusable in the eyes of your support department is a matter of public
> record in this newsgroup, and yet here you are, in the same newsgroup, focusing
> on what ... harshness? If your company is unaware of what your support
> department is telling customers, is that our responsibility? Who could possibly
> turn this around? (My money's on you, and I hope I'm pushing you in that
> direction).
>

I was focused on gaining the specifics of your issues so that I could
get that information to the appropriate parties here. Apologies if any
ancillary comments made you feel otherwise.


> Some time back, you and I had a discussion along these lines
> YOU: "... do you think we should pull programmers off of new work to deal with
> bug reports?"
> ME: "No ... but let's not be too hasty"
>
> Well today, I'm changing my tune, *Absolutely* you should pull programmers from
> new content to deal with bugs, over the course of a year you would see unhappy
> customers, and your bug backlog dry up. I guarantee it. During my decades in
> programming, my policy has been to encourage bug reports to come to me directly
> and immediately, and I've taken pride in turning them within the hour. 1 hour
> doesn't even dent my ability to turn out new content, and my customers have
> never been unhappy for more than an hour. It works miracles and you should try
> it. ... if your developers have their trash put right on their desk until they
> get it right ... they will get used to the customer friendly notion of getting
> it right before it leaves, and doing it even better should it ever return.
>
> If you have programmers who find releasable code a burden on their time, the
> last thing you should do is give them new work ... do it well or don't bother
> valuable customers with it.

Our programmers are dedicated to providing a quality product, and the
current team has made eradicating bugs the priority for the 8.x cycle.
They list the fixes in each release, so folks can get a look at just how
committed they are to fixes by viewing the 8.x update download pages on
the web site.



> | > Would you like to talk 8.3?
> |
> | If you are encountering problems with 8.3 then indeed you should report
> | those problems. Whether you chose to do so here, or via our support
> | services, if you are having issues we'd like to help get them addressed.
> |
> I'm not buying the 8.x releases, though the $250 offer did merit a "take it or
> leave it" coin toss. Your own forums paint the picture vividly enough for my
> tastes. I can't add to what you could easily learn from your own forums, but I
> will add that an associate of Newtek's (who shall remain nameless) suggested
> that I upgrade, but "don't install 8.3". I didn't do either. It would be
> interesting to have a recent copy just so I could see if long standing flaws are
> still extant, I'm certainly not going to pay for the privelege.
>
> | > As for the free support being worth every penny, would you like to swap war
> | > stories?
> |
> | Again, if you have issues with our support services, you have a choice
> | of either making mysterious innuendos or specific comments here, as you
> | wish, or you can always email me specifics and I'll direct your reports
> | to the management responsible for our support services.
> |
> Mysterious Innuendos !!! Have you forgotten our discussions on this very subject
> sometime back in this very newsgroup? You insisted that my 5 month old suppoprt
> request was probably not recieved and that I should resubmit? I did so, cc'ing
> you. I recieved a response from, *not* my resubmission, but my 5 month old
> request. I saw to it you were cc'd the entire sequence of mailings that ensued,
> did I recieve anything you would call helpful? I gave them an explicit error
> message, but that was not enough to submit to a programmer!!! (Give me your code
> and 5 minutes and I'll show you the code that generated the error).
>
> But hey ... if you are really willing to help ... I've got an issue outstanding
> with your support department that I'm still hoping will be resolved. It's 25
> months old, will you help me?
>
> As you can see, I'm not a satisfied customer, which is sad, because I'm easily
> satisfied. I merely expect 7.5 to work as documented, that's what I paid for and
> that's all I ask. I understand that bugs are inevitable, but I also know from
> experience that they are easily dealt with. It's up to you.
>


Thank you for the additional specifics - I will get those to the
appropriate people here. Please note that when you say that "7.5d is
broken in a way that I and many others cannot use it" - that's the kind
of remark I referred to as a "mysterious innuendo" - if you say
something is bad, and don't say why, I can pass your assessment along
but without specifics whatever the problem is is not going to get
addressed. If you have specifics, then that's what I need in order to
provide management and development something they can act on. While
there will be no further work in the 7.5 cycle, bugs present in those
editions can be eliminated in the 8.x series if reported.




--

=========================================
Chuck Baker -- NewTek, Inc.
Senior Director of Corporate Communications
http://www.newtek.com/
=========================================