Service Pack 3 for Visual Objects 2.8
in [Visual Objects]
|
Prev: Fabzip
Next: to call an URL from insite a VO-App
From: Ginny Caughey on 3 Sep 2009 19:17 Geoff, Of course I am taking Francesco seriously! If I weren't I wouldn't waste my time on this conversation. But in the end, either the fixes in sp 3 are worth $99 to him and to you and to me, or they aren't. If they aren't don't buy it! If they are, do! How hard is that? So Francesco feels trapped - well don't we all? Not only are we trapped with code in a particular language, but also targeting a particular platform. We're trapped by our own success! But we knew going in what VO was at the time we bought It (whatever delusions we might have held about what it might become), and I think most of us would agree the product has gotten better over time from the point were we chose to allow ourselves to become trapped. In the interim most of us have made money (some of us a lot of money) building products and services with it. One of my sessions I'll be presenting in Stuttgart this fall is about what we do about all this going forward. The solution I propose, and one I know you've followed as well, is to move forward with more modern tools and languages while still keeping the profitable bits that are still in VO. With this strategy, paying $99 to fix critical problems you're having on the VO side (if you are) seems smart to me. It buys you the time to continue to move forward in a modern direction if that is your strategy. -- Ginny Caughey www.wasteworks.com "Geoff Schaller" <geoffx(a)softxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message news:SyXnm.15724$ze1.12820(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... > You aren't taking him seriously Ginny. > > There was a simple promise made last year to repair the NEW bugs > introduced into SP2. Almost a year goes by with us all putting up with > these bugs only to find that we must now pay for this and almost nothing > important new (the list is published and it is not very impressive or > enticing). > > In fact one wonders what Robert has been doing all year or has his > available time now being absorbed with Vulcan? > > I think Brian is avoiding a commercial obligation and that is what > Francesco is drawing attention to. The result will be a further > contraction of VO use and less revenue for Brian. > > Geoff > > > > "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message > news:001bcb70$0$4877$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com: > >> Francesco, >> >> So are planning on dropping VO? Or do you just want to complain? >> >> -- >> >> Ginny Caughey >> www.wasteworks.com >> >> >> > >
From: Geoff Schaller on 3 Sep 2009 19:34 No, you are wrong. Think back. When the VOPS started, Brian officially cancelled his beta group (which had a separate formal membership and NDA) and reverted to the VOPS as the basis for product testing. In fact, many times you will find explicit references to the fact that patches and SPs would not be released until the VOPS had a chance to test and peruse new work from Robert. Beta testing was a stated function of the VOPS forum and the benefit to members was that they got early access to such fixes. VOPS always was Brian's beta forum. There can be no other conclusion. And there is no other separate beta group. Geoff "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message news:001c1e48$0$11221$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com: > No, Geoff, you are wrong. VOPS is a service for early access to code. They > are not paying beta testers, although many of them do test new builds and > provide feedback so they get their own issues resolved. > > -- > > Ginny Caughey > www.wasteworks.com
From: Geoff Schaller on 3 Sep 2009 20:04 Actually no. There is no bright side and I will use this SP as a guide as to whether I will participate in future ones. If the new SP does not contain new bugs as Willie has attested (brave move Willie <g>) then I will participate in future SPs based on the published content. If this one creates new bugs all over that I then have to wait 12 months to get fixed and then pay for that, I am likely to revert to SP2 and forget all future interest in GrafX patches. I don't find Brian's attitude as reasonable. "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message news:001c1dda$0$11238$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com: > Look at the bright side, Geoff - this way you know what you'll be getting in > advance. If sp 4 happens and contains features and/or bug fixes that you > want, you'll buy that one too. This model provides an incentive to Grafx to > provide what VO developers want. > > -- > > Ginny Caughey > www.wasteworks.com
From: Willie Moore on 3 Sep 2009 23:18 Alwyn, Under sp3 I get 533 0 534 The FIRST time through the loop, the rest of the iterations I get: 534 0 534 Regards, Willie "Power Neet" <alwin(a)nederpelt.nl> wrote in message news:e6b28fb8-00a8-4680-a65c-52c9c2346291(a)m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > Hi Willie > >> FUNCTION Start() > LOCAL X > FOR X:=1 TO 10 > ? maxatom() > ? Val("GRAFX001") > ? maxatom() > WAIT > NEXT >> RETURN NIL >> > > > Try it, > > alwin > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 4392 (20090903) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4392 (20090903) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
From: Willie Moore on 3 Sep 2009 23:23
Geoff, Actually there is a beta group for both VO and Vulcan. Regards, Willie __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4392 (20090903) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com |