Quote:
Originally Posted by popesammyjoe
Their excellent past makes other users want to launch into an apologetic of why Omnigroup can't really be held responsible for this.
|
Not in my case; I'm not aware of their past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popesammyjoe
However, my statement still stands: they cared more about the $$$ then the quality of the software. They released unusable software.
|
I must have been exceptionally lucky then, because while not perfect it was perfectly useable for me even on day one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popesammyjoe
We can admire them for trying to clean up the mess, but it still doesn't excuse the fact that they, knowing all the professed limitations of this platform,....
|
They might have known
some of the limitations, but no-one ever knows
all the limitations of a brand new platform, and anyway "limitations" and "bugs revealed by experience" are not the same thing. Bugs revealed by experience can only be revealed with, umm, experience, which your proposal denies them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by popesammyjoe
........just to go out with stinky software rather than keep it gestating.
|
Well appart from the obvious cheap shot about extended gestation generally making stinks worse, I'll return to my original question - when would you have had them release it? Without real world closed group testing, which is pretty well blocked by Apple (no trial periods, no beta testing route), what use is gestation?
Mark