Author: Odd Gunnar Malin
Date: 01:49:37 08/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 21:11:21, Robert Pawlak wrote: >On August 29, 2001 at 17:57:01, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: > >> >>Are you saying that we should be pleased that we get a patch? I don’t know any >>company that don’t release patches when there are bugs. >>If I buy a car and the air-condition is not working, I expect the seller to fix >>this and not put in a CD player instead. > >CA 6.1 = update. Builds past 6.1 = "patch". > >Are you saying you do not appreciate a free CD player? And as far as I know, >Convekta is making a good faith effort to fix your air conditioning. when you >take your car in for service, do you immediately start insulting the service >manager? Maybe this is why your air conditioning is not working? > >Also, you should realize that the car, like CA, is complex, and sometimes there >are minor problems. So I think your analogy with the AC is not correct. Maybe >call it a burned out bulb in the glovebox. What do you know about why the customers buy the product? At least I do read the announcement to get some info of what I buying and this ICC interface was well documented before the release of CA6, so the only thing you could be sure about is that someone somewhere are using some of this functions. > >>>Crafty is working fine for me. I use it occasionally for analysis. >>> >> >>Hmm.. I took my time to test it again (now on a new PC). >> >>There’s at least two thing that could be viewed I immediately. Missing analyses >>in analysis window. No inline comment in the game score (depth, time, >>evaluation). >>And if you turn on auto kibitzes, you will see that this too are missing. >>It could be the same bug for all tree problems. >>(I was playing with Blitzin from another PC against it) >> > >This particular bug that you mentioned was already documented by someone else. Way not say so in the first place and spare me for another test. > >But Crafty works fine in analysis mode, which is part of what I wrote >originally. Every person has a set of functions that he/she uses regularly. >Logging engine data on ICC is not one that I use every day. > Oh, I see, you were talking about the weather in California. Sorry, since you were answering my post, I thought you were …... yes, answering my post. >I am truly sorry for any hardship that you endured because of this. > >>No, I had not seen that (it was the credit box). >>I was thinking of you more that a combination of they that surrounds you (on the >>list). > >Whatever this means. > >>It was not sarcastic meant therefore I added **for finding bugs** to beta >>tester. >>I reacted on that you had only found one or two bugs, but I found more than that > >First of all, this is not what I said. Here is the original: > >There has been a bug or two that I have experienced since the last build, but >overall I am overjoyed with CA 6.1, and it works 100% of the time for the >functions that I use every day. It really does a lot for comparatively little >$$$. > >Read it again so it sinks in. It says since the last build. It also mentions >that it works 100% for what I use every day. Not what you use - what I use. > >>the first hour after downloading the patch and I am only a user. >> > >Wow - a coincidence - I am a user also! > I’m confused. First you insist you are a beta-tester and now you are not???? >>>I already spend a significant amount of free time testing CA (and some other >>>programs as well). What this means is using many functions that are totally >>>unimportant to me (or possibly not fully understood), and spending large amounts >>>of time documenting steps and processes to reproduce those bugs that I have be >>>able to find. All told, I probably spent at least 140 hours on this. >>> It isn’t easy to distinct what is hobby and what is work. For me all work I do for the chess community is in the category hobby and I don’t take money for it. But what happened when you make your hobby your work? Take a look at all the work Eric Schiller have done with his CaXML. >>>Every single bug that I reported has been fixed. Every e-mail I sent was >>>responded to. >>> >>>Now, if you are willing to pay my salary while I do this testing, and give me >>>the means to fix anything I find, then I am more than happy to share in the >>>responsibility for any bugs that go unfound. >>> >> > >But you seek to hold me responsible... Therefore, you must pay if you expect >service. > Sorry. I did not know that a bug report cost money. I ensure you that I will never send more bug reports. Could you send me the bill for these reports I have sent? That should be for Ca5/5.1 ca. 20 and for CA6 ca. 10 reported bugs. I have not sent any for CA61 if you don’t take payment for reporting bugs in forums too. >>If you get to little pay for your work, maybe you should direct this to the >>employer and not to the customer. I just pay for the product and have no >>influence where the money goes. >> >>Odd Gunnar > >Unfortunately, my employer does not pay me for this kind of work. Does yours? Of course I expect to be paid if I do some work for a commercial program/firm. At least I would expect to get a free copy of the program I’m beta testing. For CA that would be some hours with extensive testing. > >Also, I have wasted too much time on this, so: Why did you then bother to give such a foolish answers? > >Bye! Ok. I’m not sure if you are within this product or not. If not, then this conversation have no interest to me either. Odd Gunnar
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.