VOPS
in [Visual Objects]
|
From: @je on 13 Nov 2005 20:32 I'm not Ginny, I've been the messenger myself to often. so effectively the message is there is nothing to be expected for VO32 untill summer 2006 unless I join VOPS (which I can't). That's very disappointing news. Ed "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message news:3tq6j7FtuoenU1(a)individual.net... > Ed, > > Please don't try to shoot the messenger. <g> Geoff asked if there were > announcements, and I reported them. I think it's pretty unlikely that > Grafx would be able to sell very many copies of VO 2.8 if nobody knew what > the enhancements were, so surely by the time 2.8 is ready for sale, that > detailed info will be available. > > -- > Ginny > > > "@je" <Ed_XXX_@_XXX_SoftwareObjectives.com.au> wrote in message > news:4377b14b$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> We seen that statement before, why would we believe that now? >> >> Ed >> >> "Ginny Caughey" <ginny.caughey.online(a)wasteworks.com> wrote in message >> news:3tjraiFsms2rU1(a)individual.net... >>> NC, >>> >>> There was no announcement about the details of VO 2.8, but it is not a >>> patch and will contain new functionality. I'm sure by the time 2.8 is >>> available those details will also be available however. >>> >>> I'm not sure what you mean about Vulcan and CULE, but if you prefer CULE >>> then of course that is what you should use. If you want to wait to make >>> a decision until after Vulcan.NET is released, then you can compare them >>> at that point and decide which meets your needs better. >>> >>> -- >>> Ginny >>> >>> >>> "N.Coppernigk" <n.coppernigk(a)gazeta.pl> wrote in message >>> news:1131722267.866773.146810(a)g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >>>> Hi Ginny, >>>> >>>> thanks for sharing the news with us. >>>> >>>>> There will be no more free public patches to VO 2.7. >>>> >>>> So what is new in VO2.8 ? >>>> If it contains only a patch, it makes concerns for me >>>> to pay for a patch. >>>> If this go on with Vulcan, i prefer further CULE. >>>> >>>> Bye >>>> NC >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
From: Jamal on 14 Nov 2005 00:36 Geoff, While I agree that you're a very valuable resource and at sometimes have provoking ideas and thus you should not be censored, I still think that you have brought on yourself for not obeying some basic rules, and things went out of control to a distracting level and then ended between Geoff on one side and the other members on the other side. At times, you seemed to be acting as the owner of VO (from past observations made by this NG users and VOPS), and it might be because you like VO so much ;) I am sure you heard and know the saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Having said that, for the sake of VO and Vulcan, I think GrafX should make it clear what their "fair" upgrade policy is or will be and to clear the confusion, which hopefully will make the majority happy. Jamal "Geoff Schaller" <geoffxx(a)softxxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message news:4377caa2$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > Marc, > > If you think about it, the "geoff's" are not so different. When we are > face to face you and I can look one another in the eye and say our piece, > argue politely and then if we still disagree, we just part company still > friends. We don't have to agree on everything and I suspect we never will. > That's OK. > > For some reason here (and maybe because we cannot look 'eye-to-eye') > people seem to take things on a very personal level and then resort to > silly personal attacks. Further, I don't think they really try to read the > post or listen to someone try to qualify their writing if challenged. I > don't resort to silly attacks but I will comment strongly. That's me. If > the other side of the equation does not want to continue arguing then they > should say their piece and be done. Everyone else is free to ignore. > > Now look back at my position over the range of posts in the last 48 hrs. > You would be entitled to draw the following conclusions: > > 1. I believe in a VOPS or something like it for VO's future. > 2. I believe Vulcan is necessary for VO's future > 3. I think Vulcan has been going great guns. > > At no stage have I spoken against VOPS or Vulcan yet that might not be the > conclusion you would draw reading other people's posts. I do however have > the following additional attitudes: > > 1. I am unhappy with the VO32 support being given by GrafXSoft > 2. I am unhappy with the lack of information from GrafXSoft > 3. I now believe there are better models for the VOPS. > 4. I am uncomfortable with the attitude to bug fixes. > 5. I am unhappy that Brian can and does now discriminate on who can pay > for fixes and upgrades to their VO version via the VOPS. > 6. I have not asked anything it is not reasonable to ask. > > In the Microsoft world there are whole forums dedicated to complaining > about Microsoft. These are sponsored by Microsoft and Microsoft seems > entirely happy to live with it and deal with it. That is a mature approach > but it is a maturity that seems to escape Brian. > > It's a pity. > > Geoff > >
From: Geoff Schaller on 14 Nov 2005 01:54 Jamal. 1. I've been what I've been for the last 6 years. That is consistency. 2. I did not disobey ANY rules. And to be precise, on the 3 occasions when Brian asked me to stop on a particular thread, I did. That is fact. The simple fact is that he just doesn't like me agitating for more priority in thinking and action for VO32 and for greater compatibility in Vulcan for VO32. There is almost nothing more to it than that. A difference of opinion. 3. Me a distraction? You can't call a dozen posts a distraction. And who is it a distraction to? Don? Don has written about 6-7 times the volume I wrote and he participated in clcvo threads with volumes and volumes where I didn't even post once. Brian? Well I didn't see Brian's posts. Paul? Nope... no paul posts. Ok, so where is the distraction? The 3 same others who always participated? They didn't have to and anyone can mark a thread as read. So please explain the distraction. 4. You are clearly asking GrafXsoft to give us info. That is all I am asking here also. How are we different? 5. I've never claimed to own VO. Such statements only come out of the mouths of others. Geoff "Jamal" <vodotnet(a)REMOVETHIS-YAHOO.COM> wrote in message news:OnVdf.20614$rc7.8571(a)fe12.lga: > Geoff, > > While I agree that you're a very valuable resource and at sometimes have > provoking ideas and thus you should not be censored, I still think that you > have brought on yourself for not obeying some basic rules, and things went > out of control to a distracting level and then ended between Geoff on one > side and the other members on the other side. At times, you seemed to be > acting as the owner of VO (from past observations made by this NG users and > VOPS), and it might be because you like VO so much ;) I am sure you heard > and know the saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". > Having said that, for the sake of VO and Vulcan, I think GrafX should make > it clear what their "fair" upgrade policy is or will be and to clear the > confusion, which hopefully will make the majority happy. > > Jamal > > "Geoff Schaller" <geoffxx(a)softxxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message > news:4377caa2$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... > > > Marc, > > > > If you think about it, the "geoff's" are not so different. When we are > > face to face you and I can look one another in the eye and say our piece, > > argue politely and then if we still disagree, we just part company still > > friends. We don't have to agree on everything and I suspect we never will. > > That's OK. > > > > For some reason here (and maybe because we cannot look 'eye-to-eye') > > people seem to take things on a very personal level and then resort to > > silly personal attacks. Further, I don't think they really try to read the > > post or listen to someone try to qualify their writing if challenged. I > > don't resort to silly attacks but I will comment strongly. That's me. If > > the other side of the equation does not want to continue arguing then they > > should say their piece and be done. Everyone else is free to ignore. > > > > Now look back at my position over the range of posts in the last 48 hrs. > > You would be entitled to draw the following conclusions: > > > > 1. I believe in a VOPS or something like it for VO's future. > > 2. I believe Vulcan is necessary for VO's future > > 3. I think Vulcan has been going great guns. > > > > At no stage have I spoken against VOPS or Vulcan yet that might not be the > > conclusion you would draw reading other people's posts. I do however have > > the following additional attitudes: > > > > 1. I am unhappy with the VO32 support being given by GrafXSoft > > 2. I am unhappy with the lack of information from GrafXSoft > > 3. I now believe there are better models for the VOPS. > > 4. I am uncomfortable with the attitude to bug fixes. > > 5. I am unhappy that Brian can and does now discriminate on who can pay > > for fixes and upgrades to their VO version via the VOPS. > > 6. I have not asked anything it is not reasonable to ask. > > > > In the Microsoft world there are whole forums dedicated to complaining > > about Microsoft. These are sponsored by Microsoft and Microsoft seems > > entirely happy to live with it and deal with it. That is a mature approach > > but it is a maturity that seems to escape Brian. > > > > It's a pity. > > > > Geoff > > > >
From: Ginny Caughey on 14 Nov 2005 07:51 Jamal, Grafx already made it clear what their upgrade policy is. Whether some people agree or not or consider it "fair" or not doesn't matter. As far as I can tell, Grafx has carefully considered how they can continue keep VO afloat financially, and giving away upgrades for free won't accomplish the goal of funding continued development efforts. (And by the way, I consider Vulcan.NET a critically important part of this total effort since maintaining and enhancing it over time will be much less expensive for Grafx than contining to work with the code base they got from CA.) -- Ginny "Jamal" <vodotnet(a)REMOVETHIS-YAHOO.COM> wrote in message news:OnVdf.20614$rc7.8571(a)fe12.lga... > Geoff, > > While I agree that you're a very valuable resource and at sometimes have > provoking ideas and thus you should not be censored, I still think that > you have brought on yourself for not obeying some basic rules, and things > went out of control to a distracting level and then ended between Geoff on > one side and the other members on the other side. At times, you seemed to > be acting as the owner of VO (from past observations made by this NG users > and VOPS), and it might be because you like VO so much ;) I am sure you > heard and know the saying "The road to hell is paved with good > intentions". > Having said that, for the sake of VO and Vulcan, I think GrafX should make > it clear what their "fair" upgrade policy is or will be and to clear the > confusion, which hopefully will make the majority happy. > > Jamal > > "Geoff Schaller" <geoffxx(a)softxxwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message > news:4377caa2$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> Marc, >> >> If you think about it, the "geoff's" are not so different. When we are >> face to face you and I can look one another in the eye and say our piece, >> argue politely and then if we still disagree, we just part company still >> friends. We don't have to agree on everything and I suspect we never >> will. That's OK. >> >> For some reason here (and maybe because we cannot look 'eye-to-eye') >> people seem to take things on a very personal level and then resort to >> silly personal attacks. Further, I don't think they really try to read >> the post or listen to someone try to qualify their writing if challenged. >> I don't resort to silly attacks but I will comment strongly. That's me. >> If the other side of the equation does not want to continue arguing then >> they should say their piece and be done. Everyone else is free to ignore. >> >> Now look back at my position over the range of posts in the last 48 hrs. >> You would be entitled to draw the following conclusions: >> >> 1. I believe in a VOPS or something like it for VO's future. >> 2. I believe Vulcan is necessary for VO's future >> 3. I think Vulcan has been going great guns. >> >> At no stage have I spoken against VOPS or Vulcan yet that might not be >> the conclusion you would draw reading other people's posts. I do however >> have the following additional attitudes: >> >> 1. I am unhappy with the VO32 support being given by GrafXSoft >> 2. I am unhappy with the lack of information from GrafXSoft >> 3. I now believe there are better models for the VOPS. >> 4. I am uncomfortable with the attitude to bug fixes. >> 5. I am unhappy that Brian can and does now discriminate on who can pay >> for fixes and upgrades to their VO version via the VOPS. >> 6. I have not asked anything it is not reasonable to ask. >> >> In the Microsoft world there are whole forums dedicated to complaining >> about Microsoft. These are sponsored by Microsoft and Microsoft seems >> entirely happy to live with it and deal with it. That is a mature >> approach but it is a maturity that seems to escape Brian. >> >> It's a pity. >> >> Geoff >> >> > >
From: Filip Fransen on 14 Nov 2005 09:59
I normally don't respond to this kind of threads but there is always a first time for everything : 1) Without grafxsoft there would be no vo32 anymore. 2) Every company makes their own upgrade policy ( so do I ) whether we like it or not. 3) With VOPS we get frequent updates and have direct contact with de development team. 4) This comes with a price which is neglectable for professional developpers ( yes even for small companies - like mine ) 5) Most ( if not all ) sourcode of vo32 party software is available. So when you have a compiler upgrade you can recompile all yourself and/or fix small bugs yourself. I've done this for classmate / reportpro / vocom etc... 6) A small delay has been in the vops program because of Robert's illness / Hurricane 7) Vulcan will be the successor of vo32 and grafxsoft made promisses of -as much as- possible compatibility with vo. ( limited to .clr ) 8) Vo2.8 is scheduled for summer2005 ( bug fixes and enhancements ) 9) Maybe the development of vo32 isn't going as fast as everyone would like but remember they inherited this from ca. I'm pretty sure vulcan won't suffer from the same sickness. 10) I'm not pro / contra microsoft but they are not cheap either in the long run ( yes I know they have limited cheap programs like isv ) If I compare vo under ca or grafxsoft. I must say that the latest version is great. I don't say it's perfect but a lot of issues has been solved. I'm sure that once Robert is healed the other bugs will be fixed too. For the ones that does think it isn't fair that there would be no free upgrades anymore : I understand both points of view but get over it if you use vo for your profession. I didn't take me more then 1 minute do decide : I've more then 3milj lines of code to maintain for the next 5 years. So vulcan isn't that important to me at this moment but will be in the next years. Grafx keep on the good work ( only the communication could be better ) Filip "stbo66" <stbo66(a)yahoo.it> wrote in message news:dkskit$7l2$1(a)domitilla.aioe.org... >I read vops program. I think i will subscribe it if... > > What are the benefits for vops users that ar using vo with classmate and > rp3x ? > Vulcan.net is avaiable ? > > Many thanks > Stefano Bonacina > > > > |