🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul25.172208.9598@panix.com> fnord@panix.com (Cliff Heller) writes:
>
>When you say "time and again"  I wonder what you mean.  If there was any
>indication that the data was unreliable after a while, then I'm sure Frank
>would discontinue the practice (IF he hasn't already).

It is common knowledge that formatting disks to twice their intended capacity
is Not a Good Thing.  I work in a public pc/mac lab, and I see people do
that every day... they wonder why their files are garbled, and I point out
that they used the wrong format for that disk.

I have tried formatting 720k disks to 1.44 several times and, without 
exception, format reports 'xxxxx bytes in bad sectors'.  There _is_ a
difference.

>Also, I'm glad you are an expert on his financial statement, and what he
>can afford.  Competing products cost much more, and he is keeping his costs
>down and passing the savings back to the user.

$0.70 cents extra per disk, usually.  He sells a $100 product, but skims a
bit off the top for himself, distributing it on inferior media.  If he's so
incredibly poor, he should just raise the price one dollar.

>This is a complete lie.  Although, given the way you have posted here, I
>can see how Frank is probably glad not to have you as a customer any
>longer.

Apparently the only customers he wants are the kind that never ask for 
any support at all.  Sure, that's his right, but it's completely 
unprofessional.

>Every single feature that has been incorporated into the product over the
>last few years has been a result of requests for enhancements.  The guy
>gets hundreds of requests per day, and he has to process them all.  It's
>funny that, as you say, he has such a reputation, I doubt if the authors of
>competing projects are even available for such requests.

Have you really looked into this, or is it just an unjustified blanket 
statement?  Wayne Bell, for example, has answered every piece of mail I
sent him.  (and he sent me a 1.44M disk for only $55 !)

>You flamed the author of SL software, who has put a great deal of effort
>into a product that he earns his living with.

So?  If it is an inferior product, Doc has every right to point that out.

>You made a blanket statement and used unnecessarily harsh language.  You
>did not say "These are my opinions and here is where I feel Searchlight is
>deficient" 

Do you expect everything posted to the net to be marked "these are my 
opinions"?  It should be obvious to anyone, without the label, that 
"Searchlight sucks" is an opinion.

>Given the nature of what you've posted here, it is clear that you are more
>committed to being right, and complaining than you are to making any
>progress.  Probably Searchlight software does not suit your needs then, and
>I feel sorry for the company that now has to provide you with "customer
>service" 

Pity the poor customer-service people whose egos are too fragile to handle
any negative commentary at all... 

I feel sorry for any customer who has to deal with someone like you, who 
responds to complaints with insults and namecalling.
-- 
And now, Deep Thoughts, by Jack Handey:
    If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, go real limp, so people will think
    you're a dummy, and they'll try to catch you, because hey, free dummy!
hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu             _V_a_l_h_a_l_l_a BBS, 217-352-3682, WWIV4.21, 14.4k