Xref: utzoo comp.os.msdos.programmer:4481 comp.windows.ms.programmer:1720 comp.lang.c++:12694 comp.lang.pascal:6010
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!netcom!sjsumcs!horstman
From: horstman@mathcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.pascal
Subject: Re: Borland flaming (was Re: There is now a bugs@borland.com address)
Message-ID: <1991Apr5.040610.28165@mathcs.sjsu.edu>
Date: 5 Apr 91 04:06:10 GMT
References: <23964@well.sf.ca.us> <1991Apr2.155353.2031@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Apr4.015027.2680@objy.com>
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Lines: 27

In article <1991Apr4.015027.2680@objy.com> jeffw@objy.com writes:
>
>If you've been following Sidney's posts you've surely seen his comments
>about the fact that most of the company doesn't have access to the net.
>
>Sometimes people on the net forget that PC software companies are quite
>likely to be unaware of Usenet.  Once in a while a lone person from a PC
>software vendor wanders into the net.
>
>He normally answers questions to the best of his ability and occasionally
>passes things on to others inside his company.  After a few months of this
>he invariably will get flamed, roasted and personally attacked for the
>shortcomings of (pick one): the company, its products, its customer service,
>its upgrade policy, his parentage.

Since I was the one who complained originally, let me set the record straight.
I did NOT intend to flame at all. I tried to make the constructive suggestion
that Borland try to offer us a deal--check against a bug list before posting,
and in return we get an acknowledgment. Sidney gives a pretty convincing
argument that this isn't going to work out. 

Let's face it, Borland has a good track record in their C++ development,
and I have no reason to flame them for anything. I think it is a good
thing that they are moving to the net and don't limit their support to 
Compuserve. 

Cay