🚀 go-pugleaf

  [ note that I am no longer following up on this on the lang.c
    newsgroups; it no longer seems to relate to C  ]

 jmann@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Jim Mann) posts...

>The problem with returning software you don't like is that there is a very
>fuzzy line between "doesn't work" and "doesn't work as cleanly/elegantly
>as I would like it to."  If you buy an editor, let's say, and it's quite
>kludgy: it uses idiotic key sequences, non-standard menus, and so forth.
>You can't stand using it.  Yet it does all this with no "bugs."  Should you
>be able to return it for a refund?  

 My comments were directed at software which is buggy; i.e., which 
 fails to preform its proper funtion, such as a C compiler which 
 fails to compile legal C code, or which fails to offer some feature
 described on the box.   In other words, I'm saying that "implied
 warranty" laws should apply just as much to software as any other
 product.   In those cases the line is not so fuzzy.  In cases where
 it is fuzzy I would apply the same standards to software as to other 
 products, i.e., "suitability of use" and similar standards.

>If you answer yes to the above, does this mean that you should be able to
>return any book that you buy but don't like?

  I don't think you can make the same rules for what are, for most
  people, single-use items, like books and videos.   This would also
  apply to single-use sfotware like tax preparation software.  And
  I'm not aware that any states' implied warranty laws cover books
  based on their content.    I think this sort of argument is a straw
  man.

                                                ---Peter