Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!nosun!qiclab!m2xenix!puddle!f101.n273.z1.fidonet.org!Peter.M..Perchansky
From: Peter.M..Perchansky@f101.n273.z1.fidonet.org (Peter M. Perchansky)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2
Subject: Re: HELLO
Message-ID: <1882.26F2C0F8@puddle.fidonet.org>
Date: 13 Sep 90 14:35:11 GMT
Sender: ufgate@puddle.fidonet.org (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:273/101 - Schizophrenia, Fleetwood PA
Lines: 17

Hello Frank:

    JPI does honor their refund policy... but only up to 30 days.  The problem with that policy in conjunction with version 2.00 is most of the bugs did not show up after 30 days.

    Even after the bugs showed up, we were promised by JPI that JPI would get it right the second time around.  So, as you already know, most of us became placated hoping release 1.05 would fix all of the problems.

    Release 1.05 did not meet expectations.  Don D., Head of Tech Support at JPI, informed me that several files were "touched" that should not have been worked on.  Don stated that was part of the reason that many 3rd party toolkits (Solid Software's Btree Toolkit for instance) would not work with release 1.05.  Don stated that every release thereafter may cause the same problems.

    I am still saving up for Stony Brook Modula-2.  In the mean time I've switched back to JPI 1.17.

    Would you please consider posting your benchmarks, opinions, etc. about JPI TopSpeed Modula-2 1.17, JPI M2 2.00, and Stony Brook M2?



--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!273!101!Peter.M..Perchansky
Internet: Peter.M..Perchansky@f101.n273.z1.fidonet.org