🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Nov.11.16.01.36.1990.5176@dorm.rutgers.edu> medici@dorm.rutgers.edu (Mark Medici) writes:
>roper@nwnexus.WA.COM (Michael Roper) writes:
>
>>Silvia Takahashi writes:
>
>>> [...that if Express is installed as the shell, the 
>>> "Maximize Automatically" option can cause a UAE.]
>
>>Yes, there appear to be some inconsistencies in the way
>>Windows interacts with shell applications.  While none
>>of the systems at hDC exhibit this problem (I have run
>>with the above configuration for months without seeing
>>this behavior), it has been reported by others and will be
>>addressed in the next version of Express (or, even better, 
>>Windows).  Until then, the workaround is to disable the 
>>"Maximize Automatically" option.
>
>With all due respect and politeness, I strongly suggest that hDC offer
>a fixed version of Express to its registered customers as soon as
>possible and at no charge.  I for one, and I am sure the general
>public, are getting sick and tired of being forced to wait and pay for
>bug fixes in the form of upgraded versions.  Often, the new or
>improved features of an upgrade are also accompanied by their own
>anomalies, and are of secondary importance to a user who really only
>needs a fully functional version of the existing product.
>
>If an advertised feature is not working as described, the
>publisher/marketer should make the necessary reparations without
>charge to persons who legally acquire and use the product.  Doing
>otherwise diminishes the benefits of paying for a product (versus
>pirating it) and erodes confidence in and loyalty to you, the
>publisher/marketer.
>
>I believe that upgrades are an important service to the industry.
>However, a registered owner should not be forced to pay for an upgrade
>to correct existing problems with a product.  Rather, the user should
>be allowed the ability to determine the appropriateness of the new
>features in his/her environment, and decide to purchase or pass on the
>upgrade based on this evaluation.
>-- 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Mark Medici/SysProg3 * Rutgers University/CCIS * medici@elbereth.rutgers.edu
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  They are probably no worse than much of the industry and may even be better
but the point is well taken - if cars can be recalled then so can software.

  I dont think that a govt agency (=lobbying center) is the answer but maybe
a software users foundation (there *is* a Software Publishers association
to promote *their* interests) is appropriate. Software licenses and their
caveats notwithstanding, I think the presence of a feature implies a
warantee for its operation and functionality and a bug is a breech (sp?) of
that warantee. It's time to see that such explicit and implied warantees
are enforced.

 Does anyone know of such an organization ?

Jeff Sicherman