🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <1991Apr1.201525.19100@athena.mit.edu>, by lutwak@athena.mit.edu (Robert Lutwak):
> In article <1991Mar30.030352.2451@borland.com> sidney@borland.com (Sidney Markowitz) writes:
> 
> 	Let me get this straight:
> 	Last time I encountered a bug in a Borland product, it took me six
> months to convince the you-must-have-made-pointer-error technical servicers
> that there was, in fact, a bug.  Finally, you sent me a free upgrade.  Now
> you expect me not only to debug your compiler for you, but you're not even 
> going to send me "confirmation, fixes, or workarounds," so that I have to
> buy the "new, improved" version.
> 	Sign me up.

This is gonna sound nasty, but, do you support your software, or is it
on the market?  I don't mean to be mean here, just a question of
experience.  BTW, if it took you six months, you worked too hard.  I've
definitely found it easier to work around bugs.  I definitely speak from
experience as the code part of my staff ports now works on 22 different
operating systems (including the CDC Cyber NOS/VE stuff - oooohhh, ick).
Just send your stuff in and feel a part of the system.  Till you own
a Borland, thats all you get.  Sucks don't it?  Thats known as American
incentive.

I note your address is Athena.  You oughta know abut the multitudes
of BUG reports that are not quite bugs in X.  Some certainly are, some
certainly aren't.  Gotta filter somehow.  (Borland, 6 months is a little
long though.  Even IBM (AIX) gets back before a few days).

|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Tom Hite					|  The views expressed by me |
|Manager, Product development			|  are mine, not necessarily |
|CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc.	|  the views of CADSI.       |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|