Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: I hate WinQVT, but I still can't find anything better.
Message-ID: <24425112@bfmny0.BFM.COM>
Date: 1 Jun 91 00:20:03 GMT
References: <24425107@bfmny0.BFM.COM> <1991May31.205827.15299@ccad.uiowa.edu>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM (Tom Neff)
Lines: 28

>>>WinQVT is a usable package.  In fact sorry to say it is the best package
>>>I know, but I refuse to register for a package that has this many bugs,
>>                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>and seems very unresponsive to customer complaints.
>>                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> How do you know they're unresponsive to customer complaints?  If you
>> refuse to register, you're not a customer.
>
>In business, customers generally include prospective customers.  The
>prospects are EVERY bit as important as the licensed.  I hope ALL
>software developers share this belief.

This is probably one of the ways where shareware has to be a little
different.  In shareware, you have given away your product FIRST and
must then cultivate actual *customers* after the fact.  Everyone is
important, yes, but your obligation to support non-payers is minimal.
Otherwise there would be no incentive to pay.

I am sure shareware developers record ideas for improvements from everyone,
paying and non-paying alike.  But *responsiveness*, in the sense of hand
holding freeloaders who complain, is not a reasonable expectation.

If registered WinQVT users get no response either, then there is grounds
for legitimate complaint; but the above quoted posting gives no evidence
about this one way or the other.
-- 
Show me a sane man and I will    ///O\   Tom Neff
cure him for you. -- Carl Jung   \\\O/   tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM