Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!bloom-beacon!snorkelwacker!usc!ucsd!ogicse!oregon!jmeissen
From: jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org (John Meissen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice, er, Lettuce strikes again
Message-ID: <424@oregon.oacis.org>
Date: 17 Mar 90 00:22:12 GMT
References: <1990Mar16.211641.6821@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Organization: Oregon Advanced Computing Research, Beaverton, OR
Lines: 107



  >[Warning, severe flames and strong language ahead]

I've known some primadonnas in my time, but you, sir, are one of the
worst.

  >................. I tell the phone geek that the 5.05 patches
  >complain about not having the right version to patch.  Suprise,
  >surprise - he actually knew that a wrong 5.04 was shipped out.

So somebody else reported it before you did, and you don't get the
gold star for being the first. So sorry!

  >......... His solution - "Wait a couple of weeks - we are
  >preparing a new 5.05 to take care of the bad 5.04 disks."

You would rather they didn't change it? Or perhaps you would prefer
they wait until the next release? C'mon, guy, the worst that comes
out of this is that you don't use the patches until you get the new
fixes (assuming you were intelligent enough to follow the directions
and use a copy of your originals, which may be assuming a lot in your
case).

  >................... After all, Technical Stupidity wouldn't have
  >listened to my call if they hadn't had my name, serial no, and phone.

Whoever told you THAT? Lattice built a reputation on having tech
support that was accessible. Did they tell you they wouldn't talk
to you, or are you making this up, too?

  >What Lettuce should be doing, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY CLAIM THAT ONLY A
  >*SMALL* number of the 5.04 disks were bad, is send out a set of
  >5.05 MASTERS.  Not the manuals, just the masters.  Hell, they must
  >have them, after all - what are they selling?

Sheesh! What a bone-head! First of all, if they don't have a fix yet
they probably aren't shipping anything. They'll probably hold shipment
until they get it working. Also, terms are relative. To someone like
you, who is probably not capable of producing anything you could palm
off on more than 10 or 20 people, a *SMALL* number is around 5 or 6.
However, when you ship 800 - 1,000 compilers a month, a small number
could be, say, 500. The product consists of 5 disks. Your "solution"
would mean shipping 2,500 disks, at around a buck or more a disk.

  >............  So, whenever ANYONE tries to compile something with
  >both stdlib.h and string.h, (and I can't imagine ANYONE wanting to do that,
  >can you?) the damn compile will FAIL.

Tell me, can you say,"text editor?" Apparently you don't know what that
is, because you haven't figured out how to use one to fix your header
files. I agree they should fix it, but in the meantime having a couple
of lines wrong in a text file shouldn't stop you from doing things.
Unless, of course, you're just used to having other people do everything
for you.

  >And what makes it better is that I have gotten mail from people
  >on the net whose 5.04 patch FIXED this problem.  So good old Lettuce
  >doesn't even know what is going on.  Surprise, surprise.

But you just said earlier that they knew a *SMALL* number of 5.04 disks
were bad. Oh, me, oh, my! You can't even keep your story straight.
Obviously some people would have their problems fixed if a *LARGE*
number of disks went out correct.

  >Ah, before I forget - my 5.04 patch BROKE LMK.  That's right.  LMK 1.05
  >(the 5.02 version) works, but LMK 1.07 (the 5.04 version) doesn't.

Aaaaww! Gee whiz. Nobody is forcing you to use V1.07.

  >...Lettuce claims that there is no known problem with LMK.
  
I think you are mis-quoting. The missing phrase here is "no
REPRODUCABLE problem." You can't fix it if you can't make it fail.

  >So, I am going to get every free upgrade coming to me and will then NEVER
  >buy another product from Lettuce again.
  
So you would rather pay for every bug fix, like some companies force you
to do. Then you would be happy and buy more products, right?

  >....................  And how about adding some phone lines so it
  >takes less than 20 tries to get through?  And a toll-free number like
  >legitimate companies have.  It kills me to spend $$$ on a phone call

It takes more than just phone lines, it takes people to staff them. Of
course, they could do these things if they charged support and
maintenance fees like a large number of professional software houses.
If you bought Xenix from SCO, you would have to pay hourly for all 
telephone support calls (unless you subscribed to their support plan
for a monthly fee). Maybe I should suggest this to Lattice.

To be honest, I'm absolutey astonished by how much and how loudly
someone can complain about something that was free. Lattice provides
you with FREE support, a FREE update, and all you can do is bitch
over the net about how you had some problems. Mister, we all have
problems. This is the real world, and nothing is perfect.

Maybe you'd better pull your head back into that womb you never left
until you learn how to live with life's little disappointments, because
there's no way you're prepared for the real ones.


"These are my own opinions because I thought of them, they're all mine,
and they don't belong to anyone else."
                | Internet: jmeissen@oacis.org
john-           | BIX: jmeissen