Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!csource!david
From: david@csource.oz.au (david nugent)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.desqview
Subject: Re: Desqview question!
Message-ID: <1881@csource.oz.au>
Date: 21 May 91 09:05:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: csource.1881
References: <5912@mindlink.bc.ca> <1991May19.083620.10825@ims.alaska.edu>
Organization: Unique Computing Pty Ltd, Melb, Aust.
Lines: 75

stern@ims.alaska.edu (Pete Stern) writes:

>In article <5912@mindlink.bc.ca>, Jordan_Melville@mindlink.bc.ca (Jordan Melville) writes:
> 
> > First, I'm not out to sabotage the people who make X00, I'm just 
> > offering a consumer's opinion. And this consumer had nothing but 
> > trouble with X00 from the start. All of the versions I have tried
> > were buggy and hindered the running of the BBS. BNU has never caused
> > me any problems, and I've found it to be better documented and 
> > generally faster. _In_my_opinion_ and my experiences, I would
> > not recommend X00 to anyone.
>
> For what it's worth I have had the opposite experience. I had nothing
> but trouble with BNU. This is not to say X00 has been completely trouble
> free but Ray Gwinn has been nothing short of amazing at times trying to
> work out problems. During one period of time he delivered 3 test
> versions within 24 hours for me to try. He has been very responsive to
> well documented bug reports.

As you can see, everyone has an opinion.  ;-)

Ask a certain Mr Marwick sometime about the record number of test versions 
of BNU that have been delivered within 24 hours...

I've tracked down so many "so-called problems" down to user abuse of
the software that I can't believe that X00 doesn't suffer the same 
fate.  X00's docs never used to be as extensive (but probably less 
crytpic - I've never claimed to be good at documenting anything!) 
than BNU's so it probably has more of this.

The real danger here is in making generalisations.  For example, one of
the reasons I had for writing BNU in the first place is that it refused
point blank to work on my machine or hardware.  I used OpusCom at the time
since it was the only alternative... yet I found it's habit of hanging 
occasionally counterproductive when it came to running a reliable full-time
mail system.

In any case, in the beginning BNU went through several revisions, mainly in
fixing the inevitable bugs in any piece of new communications software that
hasn't been tested widely.  By version 1.70, it had become stabilised - I'm
not saying that version 1.70 is as good as it could have been (nor as good
as v1.90 will be when released), but there is a VAST difference between
running any two publicly released versions of the driver.

I suspect that the same is true of X00.  I know that I'm often asked for
additional features and capabilities which require a good deal of R & D
to implement.  There's often a great deal of difficulty attached to beta
testing this on your own available equipement and that of your beta 
testers.. often you have to take a chance, provide the ability to switch
something off, and release it anyway in the hope that it doesn't crash
and burn in a particular setup.

So.. before going out and condemning ANY piece of software, you should
consider version numbers.  If BNU 1.30 didn't work for you, then perhaps
1.70 will.  Or if X00 1.10 didn't work, maybe 1.2x or so will.  (for
example, what I stated about X00 not working on my equipment was true of
v1.11, but not true of v1.24).  Generalisations about "X00 doesn't work"
or "BNU is buggy" are completely ridiculous without saying WHICH PARTICULAR
ONE.  

Both pieces of software work reliably on a wide range of systems across 
the globe 24 hours a day, and it may be that certain features of either 
driver may suit different environments.  Certainly BNU is more tuned to
my particular environment than X00 is, since that's it's initial testing
place.  Naturally I tune it heavily to give me the best results. :-) 


>David Nugent is also a fine programmer but calling Australia is a bit
>too expensive for my budget in trying to debug problems.

Understandible. :-)
-- 
 David Nugent                                      Unique Computing Pty Limited
 Communications/PC/Unix Consulting           3:632/348@fidonet 28:4100/1@signet
 Internet/ACSnet: david@csource.oz.au      Uucp: ..!uunet!munnari!csource!david