🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 21 Apr 1999 00:11:20 -0400, "Alexis R�os" <alexr@coqui.net>
wrote:

>Just want to make a statement. I don't want to cause flame here, just
>showing some facts. The only thing Borland should've said from the beginning
>is that JBuilder 2 supports JDK 1.1.7, 

You mean 1.1.6, right?

>...not JDK 1.2 like the box, manuals andweb site said.

As stated a bajillion times before in the NGs, at the time JBuilder
boxes were printed, the product was QA'd, and we shipped it, it DID
support JDK 1.2 (b3 to be specific).  Note that a copy of b3 is in the
"unsupported" directory on the CD.

Then Sun decided to change the entire Swing package locations,
introduce a whole new debug API and not only us, but everyone in the
entire Java tools market were faced with major rewrites of a bunch of
code.

> Many people that I know bought the product for the 1.2
>features, we really don't care anymore about 1.1.6 or 1.1.7 because is
>already deprecated, and we receive a handicapped product instead.  To give
>you an example about what is a good advertisement just check this page on
>Symantec.

See above.

>Please read it.. not to compare the products just as a
>constructive customer service lesson..
>
>http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/devtools.nsf/docid/1998112315523205

The constuctive comments are great, that's how we all learn how to put
out the best product possible.  This is good that it is all outlined
in black and white but the bottom line is JDK 1.2 debugging still
doesn't work with their product either.

We have anounced a Java2 compatible environment that will support
debugging that will hopefully be available by the end of next month.
I haven't heard where Symantec is on their development yet, but they
are facing the same problems we are.

>Nobody would be angry right now with Borland if they were able to publish a
>statement like the one Symantec did about their product with JBuilder 2.

It is in my list o' things to do but in support we have been a bit
strapped for resources lately.  Perhaps I can get Product Management
to give us a doc.

>What happens with us, we purchased a product for some quality that was
>supposed to have and we are not able to use it, so we wasted our money for
>nothing.

Hardly the case.  I wouldn't go as far as to say it was money for
nothing.  You have the best Java development tool on the market that
just happens to have a dated box and that is using a technology that
is moving and evolving VERY fast.

John Frazier (borland.com)

http://www.borland.com/devsupport/disclaim.html