Searching \ for 'Customer Service @ CCS (was re: Bad Disk)' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=bad+disk
Search entire site for: 'Customer Service @ CCS (was re: Bad Disk)'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'Customer Service @ CCS (was re: Bad Disk)'
1999\03\04@142003 by Jim Dolson

picon face
Dear Fellow PIC-Listers

A word of caution to anyone else on the list that uses the CCS compiler - make
sure you have a good copy of your orginal disk.  I thought that spending $99 on
a compiler was going to save me money.  Now, just to replace a corrupted disk,
I'm going to end up spending:

Original purchase: $99
Original One year maintenance: $99
Another year maintenance: $99  <- required to 'fix' my corrupted original disk
problem.

I wasn't asking for the LATEST version, just the version that I lost on my
corrupted disk.

Since I apparently need to spend some money, maybe now would be a good time to
re-evaluate compiler.  What 'professional' C compilers are out there?  Feel free
to respond directly to spam_OUTjdolsonTakeThisOuTspamiserv.net as as to not clutter up the list with
something that has probably been hashed around before.

Thanks,

Jim
.....jdolsonKILLspamspam@spam@iserv.net

"CCS Inc." wrote:

> Your reference numbers and updates have run out.  We cannot send a new disk.
> YOu can purchase the 12 months of updates for $99.00.
> Thank you
> {Original Message removed}

1999\03\04@200127 by ryan pogge

flavicon
face
F*$# them then.... just get a copy off someone on the list.
thats ridiculous that a company would do that to you, so I
say screw them
and dont buy it.... just ask someone for it.

I don't have it but if i did I would give it to you, and i
know for a fact that there are
MANY people on the list who would be willing to give it to
you.

now I know this is going to cause flames...whatever, don't
bother cause I dont care.

Im not a big fan of "WAREZ",  and i am happy to pay for a
product i like... but if they
try to take my money... I say screw em.



>Dear Fellow PIC-Listers
>
>A word of caution to anyone else on the list that uses the
CCS compiler - make
>sure you have a good copy of your orginal disk.  I thought
that spending $99 on
>a compiler was going to save me money.  Now, just to
replace a corrupted disk,
>I'm going to end up spending:
>
>Original purchase: $99
>Original One year maintenance: $99
>Another year maintenance: $99  <- required to 'fix' my
corrupted original disk
>problem.
>
>I wasn't asking for the LATEST version, just the version
that I lost on my
>corrupted disk.
>
>Since I apparently need to spend some money, maybe now
would be a good time to
>re-evaluate compiler.  What 'professional' C compilers are
out there?  Feel free
>to respond directly to jdolsonspamKILLspamiserv.net as as to not
clutter up the list with
>something that has probably been hashed around before.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jim
>.....jdolsonKILLspamspam.....iserv.net
>
>"CCS Inc." wrote:
>
>> Your reference numbers and updates have run out.  We
cannot send a new disk.
>> YOu can purchase the 12 months of updates for $99.00.
>> Thank you
>> {Original Message removed}

1999\03\04@220201 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>Original purchase: $99
>Original One year maintenance: $99
>Another year maintenance: $99  <- required to 'fix' my corrupted original disk
>problem.

You've got a good head start on a HiTech compiler.  I'd vote for that one,
but it's the one I have the most experience with.  I got it after being
frustrated to death by CCS "version du jour" policy and bug generation
services.

To say I've been happy is very conservative.

To be fair, the latest MPC is supposed to be just as good.  There are
adherents to that denomination here as well.

You get what you pay for most of the time.  I'm happy.

Andy

1999\03\04@235323 by Tjaart van der Walt

flavicon
face
Jim Dolson wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Maybe it should be posted on the list after all. There are only
two compilers for PICs that warrant consideration, MPC and Hitech.

I have never used Hitech, so I can't speak ill or good of it.
I have used MPC for over a year (probably two years), and have
never (ever) had problems with support. Walter is on the PIClist
(Hi Walter!), and will help you with finger troubles.

It supports *ALL* the PICs, and you can get header files for new
PICs as they come out. There has been minimal bugfixes over this
period, because there ain't any. I can't believe people are suckered
into buying CCS, and then forking out more money to pay for their
(reportedly) frequent bugfixes.

You can use all the C examples on Mchips site virtually as-is
with MPC.

To be fair, Clyde is also on the PIClist, and he has also given
excellent support for Hitech.

If anyone is in the market for a compiler, here's a tip :
               *You get what you pay for*

> "CCS Inc." wrote:
>
> > Your reference numbers and updates have run out.  We cannot send a new disk.
> > YOu can purchase the 12 months of updates for $99.00.

This should be re-phrased :
You haven't paid bugfix money for over a year. All our
bugs are going to get you now. You're screwed! Hahahaha!

--
Friendly Regards          /"\
                         \ /
Tjaart van der Walt        X  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
tjaartspamspam_OUTwasp.co.za  / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL
|--------------------------------------------------|
|                WASP International                |
|R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development|
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Mobile : @spam@tjaartKILLspamspamsms.wasp.co.za  (160 text chars) |
|     http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html     |
|Voice: +27-(0)11-622-8686  Fax: +27-(0)11-622-8973|
|          WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E          |
|--------------------------------------------------|

1999\03\05@091400 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>>> >replaced?  I'm not asking for the lastest version of the
>compiler, just
>>> >what I had before my disk crash.

You know another thought crossed my mind just now.

They probably DON'T HAVE a copy of what you had.  Version du Jour mentality
often skips important things like Configuration Management that _real_
companies understand the importance of.

Andy

  \-----------------/
   \     /---\     /
    \    |   |    /          Andy Kunz
     \   /---\   /           Montana Design
/---------+   +---------\     http://www.montanadesign.com
| /  |----|___|----|  \ |
\/___|      *      |___\/     Go fast, turn right,
                              and keep the wet side down!

1999\03\05@093933 by wwl

picon face
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 19:54:49 -0500, you wrote:

>F*$# them then.... just get a copy off someone on the list.
>thats ridiculous that a company would do that to you, so I
>say screw them
>and dont buy it.... just ask someone for it.
>
>I don't have it but if i did I would give it to you, and i
>know for a fact that there are
> MANY people on the list who would be willing to give it to
>you.
>
>now I know this is going to cause flames...whatever, don't
>bother cause I dont care.
>
>Im not a big fan of "WAREZ",  and i am happy to pay for a
>product i like... but if they
>try to take my money... I say screw em.
Absolutely! Any company that treats customers like this deserves to
have their stuff ripped-off.

1999\03\05@101244 by les LaForge

flavicon
face
Guys

I for one  (and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one) am very satisfied
with the CCS product.  CCS gave me a break whenI was in college and
offered alot of help and advice.

Not too many people take the time to do that now a days.  If we were to
pass a vote I'm quite sure it would favor CCS.  Please, if you are
shopping for a C compiler, do not let the opinions of a few angry
customers blind you.

Charles

1999\03\05@105157 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
So far I'd agree about CCS.  I've had several SHOWSTOPPING bugs, not the
least of which thier compiler will only allow you to use 24 RAM locations on
a part with 72 RAM locations.  I create a program that theoretically should
run fine on my part, and I get OUT OF RAM errors because their compiler
won't allow it.  I've waited two days now for an answer, and I know the
answer will be:

SEND US $99


well... it was cheap.....





{Original Message removed}

1999\03\05@133330 by Jim Dolson

picon face
Charles,

If you check the archives, I was a very vocal supporter of CCS for the
first six months that I used it.  It's a good compiler at a reasonable
price.  I am an "angry customer" because after having my HD disk crash on
me (my code was backed up, but not the compiler), I find that my ORIGINAL
diskette is corrupted.  All I want is what I bought and paid an extra years
support for.  I'm not asking for the CURRENT version, just what I've
already spent $198 on.  Is it that unreasonable?

I *LIKE* the compiler.  I'd like it more if I could reinstall and use it.

Jim

Charles LaForge wrote:

{Quote hidden}

1999\03\06@045117 by Tjaart van der Walt

flavicon
face
Charles LaForge wrote:
>
> Guys
>
> I for one  (and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one) am very satisfied
> with the CCS product.  CCS gave me a break whenI was in college and
> offered alot of help and advice.
>
> Not too many people take the time to do that now a days.  If we were to
> pass a vote I'm quite sure it would favor CCS.  Please, if you are
> shopping for a C compiler, do not let the opinions of a few angry
> customers blind you.
>
> Charles

Well, I haven't hear *one* complaint on MPC or Hitech - only cudos.


--
Friendly Regards          /"\
                         \ /
Tjaart van der Walt        X  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
KILLspamtjaartKILLspamspamwasp.co.za  / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL
|--------------------------------------------------|
|                WASP International                |
|R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development|
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Mobile : RemoveMEtjaartTakeThisOuTspamsms.wasp.co.za  (160 text chars) |
|     http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html     |
|Voice: +27-(0)11-622-8686  Fax: +27-(0)11-622-8973|
|          WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E          |
|--------------------------------------------------|

1999\03\06@051229 by Bert Koerts

flavicon
face
At 12:01 6-3-99 +0200, you wrote:
>Charles LaForge wrote:
>>
>> Guys
>>
>> I for one  (and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one) am very satisfied
>> with the CCS product.  CCS gave me a break whenI was in college and
>> offered alot of help and advice.
>>
>> Not too many people take the time to do that now a days.  If we were to
>> pass a vote I'm quite sure it would favor CCS.  Please, if you are
>> shopping for a C compiler, do not let the opinions of a few angry
>> customers blind you.
>>
>> Charles
>
>Well, I haven't hear *one* complaint on MPC or Hitech - only cudos.
>

Maybe because the low price is attractive to new users who are having a lot
of problems because they are not familiar with C. All my problems turned
out to be like this so far. I am not familiar with the other compilers, but
I do like the CCS compiler a lot. No problems at all.

Regards

Bert Koerts

1999\03\08@155542 by Lawrence Lile

flavicon
face
After calm reflection and a weekend of dancing I realize two things:

1. CCS has a different BUSINESS MODEL than many other software companies.
OLD software thinking was to charge a lot upfront.  Many new (and GNU)
companies charge low (or no) money up front and then an ongoing charge for
serviceing software.  (Some charge astronomical fees for both.)  This
business model avoids the boom and bust tendency of software companies, and
avoids the sticker shock seen with more expensive packages.  Bear in mind,
that CCS compilers will not cost less than HITECH or BYTECRAFT in the long
run, just in the short run.

2. The supposed bug I raved about below was really a feature (aargh! And
World War II was a Police Action.. )    They have a workaround,  And they
did respond, although in a very terse manner.

OK these guys are NOT so bad..






{Original Message removed}

1999\03\08@183959 by Gerhard Fiedler
picon face
At 14:52 03/08/99 -0600, Lawrence Lile wrote:
>an ongoing charge for serviceing software.

if that means "charge for bugfixes" this is ok with me if it is about GNU
or some other public license software, but not for a proprietary program i
bought (and don't even get the sources).

if somebody sells something, my POV is still that it should work as
advertised. and i've never seen a software manufacturer (including CCS)
advertise that their products may or not do what they claim... ie.
advertise that they sell it, like cheap used car dealers, "as is." and if
it doesn't do what they claim, i think it's their responsibility to make it
work, free of charge. we'll get there :)

ge

1999\03\08@202436 by Ian Cull

picon face
>  From:        spamBeGonelistsspamBeGonespamHOME.COM (Gerhard Fiedler)
>  if that means "charge for bugfixes" this is ok with me if it is about GNU
>  or some other public license software, but not for a proprietary program i
>  bought (and don't even get the sources).
>
>  if somebody sells something, my POV is still that it should work as
>  advertised. and i've never seen a software manufacturer (including CCS)
>  advertise that their products may or not do what they claim... ie.
>  advertise that they sell it, like cheap used car dealers, "as is." and if
>  it doesn't do what they claim, i think it's their responsibility to make it
>  work, free of charge. we'll get there :)
>
>  ge
>
Gerhard,
Do you ever pay any money for maintenance on your car? Or does your initial
purchase include all necessary future charges to keep it in operational order
and up to date?

Ian C.

1999\03\08@210043 by Bob Drzyzgula

flavicon
face
On Mon, Mar 08, 1999 at 08:22:21PM -0500, Ian Cull wrote:
> >  From:        TakeThisOuTlistsEraseMEspamspam_OUTHOME.COM (Gerhard Fiedler)
> >  if that means "charge for bugfixes" this is ok with me if it is about GNU
> >  or some other public license software, but not for a proprietary program i
> >  bought (and don't even get the sources).
> >
> >  if somebody sells something, my POV is still that it should work as
> >  advertised. and i've never seen a software manufacturer (including CCS)
> >  advertise that their products may or not do what they claim... ie.
> >  advertise that they sell it, like cheap used car dealers, "as is." and if
> >  it doesn't do what they claim, i think it's their responsibility to make it
> >  work, free of charge. we'll get there :)

You might as well expect a lottery ticket to come
with a guarantee that you'll win the grand prize.
most shrink-wrap software licenses specifically state
that the software is not warranted to be suitable for
any purpose in particular; you are in essence licensing
a random collection of bits that, if you are lucky,
may actually do something. Those licenses are often
particularly vile examples of the "buyer has no rights --
seller has no responsibilities" genre of legal document.
There has been much discussion in the US about the need
to change the legality of this sort of license, but it
may be some time before it gets anywhere.

--Bob
(who still hasn't changed his PICLIST subscription)

--
============================================================
Bob Drzyzgula                             It's not a problem
RemoveMEbobspamTakeThisOuTdrzyzgula.org                until something bad happens
============================================================

1999\03\08@223959 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
At 20:22 03/08/99 -0500, Ian Cull wrote:
>Do you ever pay any money for maintenance on your car? Or does your initial
>purchase include all necessary future charges to keep it in operational order
>and up to date?

we're not talking here about "keeping up to date," we're talking about
bugs, which commonly means that the program does not do what it should, not
that it is outdated. if i buy an ANSI-compliant compiler and the ANSI spec
changes, i of course don't expect them to provide me with a compiler
compliant to the new standard. but if i buy an allegedly ANSI-compliant
compiler and i find that it isn't -- what would you call that?

back to the car: i don't pay when there's something that doesn't work as
advertised in a new car. with most "material" items this is pretty clearly
covered in the warranty (if i'm not mistaken, there is even a law that
requires a minimum warranty). most (if not all) decent software
manufacturer also provide bug fixes for free. how can you call bug fixes
"maintenance"? when you buy a new car and the left rear shock is bad --
which doesn't mean the car won't run, it just reacts a little bit unusual
in some rare situations, and you can easily "work around" this "feature" by
driving slow --, would you accept this as having to be covered by an extra
"maintenance agreement"? i guess not; you probably would expect this as to
be covered by the product warranty and fixed for free.

similarily, if i have a compiler and it creates obviously wrong code -- i'm
not talking about sub-optimal code here or changed standards, i'm talking
about code that's not in accordance to the compiler specifications (as
provided by the manufacturer) and advertised claims, eg. a table read
algorithm that jumps into nowhere --, why should i pay for them to fix
that? after all, i bought the compiler based on what they say it does. if
it doesn't do it, they shouldn't claim it. or is that covered by "freedom
of speech"?

to call "bug fixing" "maintenance" is a marketing trick, and as one can
see, it does work with some. but this doesn't make it real. as i said, if i
use, say, a GNU compiler and hire a guy to fix bugs when they come up in
order not to have to rely on the user community to fix them, =that's=
maintenance, and that's ok to pay for. or if i customize a complex
accounting program and hire somebody (may be from the manufacturer) to
"maintain" my system, which in this case mostly means maintain my
customization and keeping it up to date with ever-changing fiscal
legislation, that's maintenance, too. but when i buy a product, software or
hardware or any ware, i expect it to work as advertised and/or specified,
and making it work so is =not= maintenance, that's bug fixing.

ge

1999\03\08@224819 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
At 20:59 03/08/99 -0500, Bob Drzyzgula wrote:
>You might as well expect a lottery ticket to come
>with a guarantee that you'll win the grand prize.

which tells something about the quality claims they put in their ads :)

>Those licenses are often
>particularly vile examples of the "buyer has no rights --
>seller has no responsibilities" genre of legal document.

i know that. which doesn't mean i have to like it. i think that it's mostly
a matter of a solid majority getting used to expect that it actually works
as advertised, which will then lead both legislation and interpretation of
current law in this direction. (this was the same way with "normal"
products.) that's why i rant about it every now and then :)

ge

1999\03\08@234024 by Andy

flavicon
picon face
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerhard Fiedler <listsEraseMEspam.....HOME.COM>
To: EraseMEPICLISTspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU <RemoveMEPICLISTEraseMEspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 09 March 1999 03:39
Subject: Re: Customer Service @ CCS (was re: Bad Disk)


>At 20:22 03/08/99 -0500, Ian Cull wrote:
>>Do you ever pay any money for maintenance on your car? Or does your
initial
>>purchase include all necessary future charges to keep it in operational
order
{Quote hidden}

Software companies use us to test the software, first release (v1.00) full
of bugs, second release (v1.01) all fixed, but oh dear its v1.01 so we have
to buy it again as its a new version!
They send it out faulty as they cannot find all bugs as they cannot create
all possible working conditions, if they did it would be out of date b4 it
was released (I don't agree with this mind!)
Andy.

1999\03\09@002044 by Wagner Lipnharski

picon face
Andy wrote:
> Software companies use us to test the software, first release (v1.00) full
> of bugs, second release (v1.01) all fixed, but oh dear its v1.01 so we have
> to buy it again as its a new version!
> They send it out faulty as they cannot find all bugs as they cannot create
> all possible working conditions, if they did it would be out of date b4 it
> was released (I don't agree with this mind!)
> Andy.

Unfortunately we are at disposition of the market, it means, software
producers use that argument. "If you don't like the way we work, just go
and search for another supplier".  This is bad and show no respect at
all
to the customer. Want a better example?  Windows95!  It was full of bugs
that "was fixed" at the Windows98, but it was not for free for who
already
paid for the '95, as a "corrected code". So we say, "what a hell, it is
just $90 for the '98 and it comes with more features", and we paid for a
new version, that still carrying more bugs and so on.  Some companies
just offer a "discount" for who already has the previous version, just
as
a way to compensate.  Instead to apply efforts to fix bugs in a software
that is already old and will not generate any more money for the
company,
they just "think" that the customers will accept to live with problems.
They try to solve a list of problems, paint with a new color, apply new
features (with more bugs) and sell again with a new version. If you want
to have the old bugs fixed, need to buy the new version.

I don't agree with software maintenance fee, this is a trick. If the fee
is to keep your software updated with new features and to "try to locate
problems" that you don't want to do it by yourself, that's ok, I saw it
widely at IBM when I was working there, but to send corrections to
bugs???
I don't expect Microsoft to fix problems to Windows3.1 anymore, but for
Windows95 still their responsibility to fix =all= the bugs without
making me feel the necessity to migrate to Windows98.  Doesn't matter
the "fine print" at the agreement, it is their moral responsibility to
make it works nice and smooth, without any "favor" from them.

Using the same comparison to the car business, imagine if you have the
same engine problems 3 or 4 times a week, and the supplier say that you
need to upgrade to the new version (year) that has the problem fixed.
Here in Florida there is a law named "Lemon Car", if it goes to repair
3 times for the same problem and the factory representative can not fix
it, it turns to be a "Lemon Car", and the factory =must= exchange for
a new car. (under the warranty period of course).

I think that specifically in this software case, it cost the same to
send an email to the technical support, company's chair main, or even
a magazine as Byte, Computer Shopper or something like that, or even
to all of above. If you paid for something you not received... it is
your right to have it, or your money back, no discussion, simple.

That's my 3 cents.
--------------------------------------------------------
Wagner Lipnharski - UST Research Inc. - Orlando, Florida
Forum and microcontroller web site:   http:/http://www.ustr.net
Microcontrollers Survey:  http://www.ustr.net/tellme.htm

1999\03\09@004652 by Tjaart van der Walt

flavicon
face
Wagner Lipnharski wrote:
>

> I think that specifically in this software case, it cost the same to
> send an email to the technical support, company's chair main, or even
> a magazine as Byte, Computer Shopper or something like that, or even
> to all of above. If you paid for something you not received... it is
> your right to have it, or your money back, no discussion, simple.
>
> That's my 3 cents.

I think that there are 1700 potential customers who will
now think twice about CCS. 'nuff said.

--
Friendly Regards          /"\
                         \ /
Tjaart van der Walt        X  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
RemoveMEtjaartspam_OUTspamKILLspamwasp.co.za  / \ AGAINST HTML MAIL
|--------------------------------------------------|
|                WASP International                |
|R&D Engineer : GSM peripheral services development|
|--------------------------------------------------|
| Mobile : RemoveMEtjaartTakeThisOuTspamspamsms.wasp.co.za  (160 text chars) |
|     http://www.wasp.co.za/~tjaart/index.html     |
|Voice: +27-(0)11-622-8686  Fax: +27-(0)11-622-8973|
|          WGS-84 : 26¡10.52'S 28¡06.19'E          |
|--------------------------------------------------|

1999\03\09@013320 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   They send it out faulty as they cannot find all bugs as they cannot create
   all possible working conditions, if they did it would be out of date b4 it
   was released (I don't agree with this mind!)

If you disagree, you're welcome to release a competing product with zero
bugs.  If you're right, it should sell like gangbusters, even without a
competitive set of features, right?  Actually, I keep telling people that
some features are bugs if they're missing.  If a customer would rather have
nested macros (a feature) with a bug preventing a macro from terminating in
the middle of a line (allowing foo: db mymacro(a,b,c), x, y), then who's to
say which is a bug and which is a feature?

(of course, what we find in real life is that customers want "the stable
version" with "just the new features *I* want", apparently not associating
the addition of features with the addition of bugs...  Bah...)

If you think you know how to test software, I suspect we have a job opening
you could fill...

BillW

1999\03\09@024039 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
At 04:32 03/09/99 +0000, Andy wrote:
>Software companies use us to test the software, first release (v1.00) full
>of bugs, second release (v1.01) all fixed,

where do you buy your software ("=all= fixed")? :)

>but oh dear its v1.01 so we have to buy it again as its a new version!

if they really fix 'em =all=, i'd probably even buy the 1.01 =gladly=!

ge

1999\03\09@084213 by wwl

picon face
On Mon, 8 Mar 1999 20:22:21 EST, you wrote:

>>  From:        EraseMElistsspamspamspamBeGoneHOME.COM (Gerhard Fiedler)
>>  if that means "charge for bugfixes" this is ok with me if it is about GNU
>>  or some other public license software, but not for a proprietary program i
>>  bought (and don't even get the sources).
>>
>>  if somebody sells something, my POV is still that it should work as
>>  advertised. and i've never seen a software manufacturer (including CCS)
>>  advertise that their products may or not do what they claim... ie.
>>  advertise that they sell it, like cheap used car dealers, "as is." and if
>>  it doesn't do what they claim, i think it's their responsibility to make it
>>  work, free of charge. we'll get there :)
>>
>>  ge
>>
>Gerhard,
>Do you ever pay any money for maintenance on your car? Or does your initial
>purchase include all necessary future charges to keep it in operational order
>and up to date?
>
>Ian C.
Totally spurious argument - cars are designed with inherent wear-out
mechanisms, software with bugs had them from day one.

1999\03\09@090542 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>to the customer. Want a better example?  Windows95!  It was full of bugs
>that "was fixed" at the Windows98, but it was not for free for who
>already

No, OSR2 was the bug fix set (and you could download most of the changes
off the site for free, btw).  Win98 was an ENTIRELY NEW set of bugs, albeit
very much based on the old set.

Andy

  \-----------------/
   \     /---\     /
    \    |   |    /          Andy Kunz
     \   /---\   /           Montana Design
/---------+   +---------\     http://www.montanadesign.com
| /  |----|___|----|  \ |
\/___|      *      |___\/     Go fast, turn right,
                              and keep the wet side down!

1999\03\09@095324 by Andy

flavicon
picon face
>    They send it out faulty as they cannot find all bugs as they cannot
create
>    all possible working conditions, if they did it would be out of date b4
it
{Quote hidden}

Bet you don't agree with having to die one day but thats just the way it is
I was just stating the facts!! keep your hair on!! and when i finish uni
i'll hold you to the job offer!! ta!
Also keeping this subject going will only damage your sales so why not give
the guy a new copy (i'll send you some blank disks if your too tight) and
keep the peace? and if you were in customer relations in any company of mine
you'd be sacked!! for the price of a couple of disks you could have had
someone come on here praising you and who knows how many new customers that
would have brought, tight as a gnats chuff eh??.
yours' all wound up,
                              Andy.

Is this [OT] now???

1999\03\09@115915 by Eric Oliver

flavicon
face
Gerhard,

I've been reading this discussion and I can't keep my mouth shut any longer
<g>.  I have long had that POV. I think we are headed for the day that
software companies will have specific legislation enforced on them because
of the lax manner in which many do business.  However, when that day comes,
the cost of software will likely sky-rocket and the legislation could
potentially stifle innovation on the part of small organizations ( read
individuals with a good idea and limited resources ).

I was a loyal Borland fan back when Borland released Quattro Pro and Turbo
C.  Over the years, MS put the squeeze on them and they began struggling ..
looking for a niche.  With each new version release of their C++ compiler,
they would leave the previous version in an incomplete state.  Right now I
am using BC++ 5.02. A product that they no longer support but stills has
glaring bugs and annoyances.  Oh, you want a product that works ? .. You
need to upgrade to Borland C++ Builder which is our replacement product for
BC++.  The only problem is that BCB is not the same product .. I own it and
I don't like it for what I do.  In moments of complete frustration, I have
wondered if a class action law suit would fix the problem ( I'm not a big
fan of law suits, that seems to be America's solution to everything ).  Oh
yeah, Borland was still advertising and selling their C++ product for OS/2
even after they had ceased development and it was _full_ of bugs that,
according to users on the forum, rendered it useless for serious
development.

On the other hand, a company that I was recently looking at buying a print
engine from sells their product for a _very_ high price.  So high, it about
knocked me flat when he first told me the price.  For a package I figured
should sell for between $300 - $750, sells for between $1000 on the low end
to almost $2000 for the professional version.  When I queried him about why
the price is so high, one of the reasons he stated was that they have spent
significant resources to ensure a solid and robust product .. translation
less bugs means more money.  However, that price, at least temporarily,
prevented me from purchasing the product.

At this point, I'm not sure what the answer is.  As with everything, life
has its trade-offs and I'm sure that if we bring regulation into the
picture, we will pay the price.

Eric

{Original Message removed}

1999\03\09@134758 by Wagner Lipnharski

picon face
Eric Oliver wrote:
[snip]
> ....I think we are headed for the day that
> software companies will have specific legislation enforced on them because
> of the lax manner in which many do business.  However, when that day comes,
> the cost of software will likely sky-rocket and the legislation could
> potentially stifle innovation on the part of small organizations ( read
> individuals with a good idea and limited resources ).

I don't think so, they are actually doing bunches of money already.
How much cost to develop a regular CAD software? $100,000 ? $200,000 ?
Suppose the Eagle CAD one... $300,000 is a good cost, isn't?
Do you really believe that they sold only 6 thousand registered copies
to pay the development cost (at $50 each one)?

What about the ones sold by $3 thousand, like Protel? Do you think they
never sold one thousand copies? It would pay a production cost of
3 Million!!! 10% in profit in United States is a good profit.  Ok, Ok,
they have other kind of expenses and things, but, to add two or three
more software engineers to keep debuging previous versions, doesn't
cost too much, and those guys can fix one or two bugs per day, so, in
sixty days they can almost clean all the reported problems.

Now tell me, why Microsoft put available at low cost all their software
list to be installed in the fresh new computers at the plant, entitled
as
"pre-installed software"?  They almost sell it by the documentation
cost.
Answer: Every cent is accounted. We can call it "the drag-along
process".
They consider several market areas, and one is the low profit but that
ensures market share, so nobody else will take those customers.

As in the car segment, they were pressed to include anti-lock-brakes,
air-bags, fuel-injection, computerized-systems, air-conditioned, and
much more, and the prices still going down, =not up=.

Even in high-price cartelized markets there is a competition between
parts, and one of the best attractive item it was, is and always will
be; =low cost=.  So, a regular compiler will not take off if offered
at $5,000. It will be *DOA* (dead on arrival).  There is a common way
to establish a market price, "how much the market would pay for it?".

--------------------------------------------------------
Wagner Lipnharski - UST Research Inc. - Orlando, Florida
Forum and microcontroller web site:   http:/http://www.ustr.net
Microcontrollers Survey:  http://www.ustr.net/tellme.htm

1999\03\09@141905 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
   Bet you don't agree with having to die one day but thats just the way
   it is I was just stating the facts!! keep your hair on!! and when i
   finish uni i'll hold you to the job offer!! ta!

Heh.  I should have made it clearer that we release 3000+ images across 50+
platforms (various combinations of features and several major "releases" at
a time.)  Every month or so.  :-)  Looks like about 50gig of binaries (some
of which are self compressed.)  (This is all conservative estimates, I think.)


   Also keeping this subject going will only damage your sales so why not
   give the guy a new copy (i'll send you some blank disks if your too
   tight) and keep the peace?

I am NOT the company mentioned in the original complaint.

I also should have mentioned that I don't have much sympathy for companies
that won't help a customer with a bug unless they have paid their fees or
will upgrade releases.  Customers capable of finding and recognizing bugs
are your friends.  Customers capable of analyzing bugs ought to be your GOOD
friends.  AFAIK, I have free reign to give customers fixed software images
at any time, with the understanding that that might mean they now have a
version that is not (can not be!) supported through the normal support
channels.  (none of the analysis or bug tracking tools will have a good idea
of what is in or not in a "special" bug-fixed image that I provided.  It's a
little embarassing when the next bug they run into shows up a year later and
they're still running the "engineering special" that was provided to fix
their last fix!)


   and if you were in customer relations in any company of mine you'd be
   sacked!!

For refusing to provide a fix?  Yeah, that wouldn't be that wise.  But the
example that started this all was someone trying to get an OLD version of
the software (not due to a bug), and as someone else pointed out, smaller
companies are not particularly likely to have the infrastructure in place
to provide an old version of software.


   for the price of a couple of disks you could have had someone come on
   here praising you and who knows how many new customers that would have
   brought, tight as a gnats chuff eh??.

Paradoxically, customers are much more impressed by fast turnaround on
bugfix requests than they are by bug-free software.  I shipped a feature
once that flat-out didn't work under some circumstance that I SHOULD have
forseen (ie I was really embarrassed!)  When the customer complained, we
turned around a fix nearly instantly, and they thought that was great!
They were probably happier than if it had worked right in the first place.

BillW
cisco

1999\03\09@141908 by Wolfgang Strobl

flavicon
face
On 5 Mar 99, 7:34  Charles LaForge wrote:

> I for one  (and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one) am very satisfied
> with the CCS product.  CCS gave me a break whenI was in college and
> offered alot of help and advice.

I second that.  I started (high level language) PIC programming with
Melabs PicBasic compiler, in a little project done for my employer.
But after comparing Melabs upgrade policy with CCSs, I decided to
go with CCS and to buy CCS C, for my personal toolset, and so far
I am quite satisfied with my decision. Both products (Melabs
Picbasic, Stamp I compatible, and CCS 14bit core compiler) have
similar price and feature sets (CCS C is faster, PicBasic has better
ASM integration).  But Melabs upgrade policy _really_ stinks,
when looked at from a German customers point of view. While
customers located in the US may get upgrades almost for free ($10
plus inexpensive local shipment), customers from overseas pay a
fortune for each and every upgrade/bugfix. CCS, on the other hand,
offers free upgrades to current versions via the internet for 30 days
after the buy, and sell continous access to actual versions for a
year, for another $99.

--
     o      (     RemoveMEWolfgang.StroblKILLspamspamgmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394
    /\        *   GMD mbH                       #include
  _`\ `_<===      Schloss Birlinghoven,         <std.disclaimer>
__(_)/_(_)___.-._  53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany ________________

1999\03\09@182524 by Andy

flavicon
picon face
-----Original Message-----
From: William Chops Westfield <billwSTOPspamspamspam_OUTCISCO.COM>
To: spamBeGonePICLISTSTOPspamspamEraseMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU <KILLspamPICLISTspamBeGonespamMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 09 March 1999 19:19
Subject: Re: Customer Service @ CCS (was re: Bad Disk)


>    Bet you don't agree with having to die one day but thats just the way
>    it is I was just stating the facts!! keep your hair on!! and when i
>    finish uni i'll hold you to the job offer!! ta!
>
>Heh.  I should have made it clearer that we release 3000+ images across 50+
>platforms (various combinations of features and several major "releases" at
>a time.)  Every month or so.  :-)  Looks like about 50gig of binaries (some
>of which are self compressed.)  (This is all conservative estimates, I
think.)
{Quote hidden}

GOOD
>friends.  AFAIK, I have free reign to give customers fixed software images
>at any time, with the understanding that that might mean they now have a
>version that is not (can not be!) supported through the normal support
>channels.  (none of the analysis or bug tracking tools will have a good
idea
>of what is in or not in a "special" bug-fixed image that I provided.  It's
a
>little embarassing when the next bug they run into shows up a year later
and
{Quote hidden}

Sorry, what I meant was it's bad to come on here and then not sort things
out while the whole pic list looked on (the company was on here weren't
they?), I'm sure you agree that now and again a little loss (the price of a
few disks after all) makes a profit in the long run, you only give a copy to
the guy who is visible to the masses and the guy who stays quiet gets nowt!
The effect of television is similar, when wingers weekly is on the TV you
promise to sort things out but when the cameras have gone you stall till its
old news, then do nothing!! Please note that these are observations of real
life incidents NOT related to me! And TV Presenters do blow things out of
all proportion and it gives old people something to do and watch!

I also apologise for mistaking you for the vendor!! Im sure you run things
differently.

Yours' all calmed down now,
                                              Andy. (-:

1999\03\09@191030 by Sean Breheny

face picon face
Hi Wagner,

At 01:45 PM 3/9/99 -0500, you wrote:
>As in the car segment, they were pressed to include anti-lock-brakes,
>air-bags, fuel-injection, computerized-systems, air-conditioned, and
>much more, and the prices still going down, =not up=.

What? Car prices consistently go UP,on an absolute scale,anyway. I haven't
taken into account inflation,but my guess it that they would still have
increased slightly. For example, my family bought a new nissan sentra in
1988 (the 88 model) for about $8000. The 97 model went for about $12,000.

Perhaps I once again misread your post,but it sure seemed that you were
saying that US car prices go down consistently.

Sean




|
| Sean Breheny
| Amateur Radio Callsign: KA3YXM
| Electrical Engineering Student
\--------------=----------------
Save lives, please look at http://www.all.org
Personal page: http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/shb7
EraseMEshb7spamEraseMEcornell.edu ICQ #: 3329174

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...