Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!sei.cmu.edu!df
From: df@sei.cmu.edu (Dan Farmer)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: ALED goes to the wastebasket here in Iceland
Message-ID: <27098@as0c.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 15 Jun 91 14:29:20 GMT
Sender: netnews@sei.cmu.edu
Lines: 52

In article <foo>, ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi) writes:
> In article <bar> frisk@rhi.hi.is (Fridrik Skulason) writes:
> >I agree - programs like this are totally unusable.  They may be easy to
> :
> >As it is, the program is just a waste of disk space....
> >Just think about it - an editor which does not allow the entry of 30% of
> >the letters in your alphabet ?
And, In article <foobar> einari@rhi.hi.is (Einar Indridason) writes:
# Otherwise it looked like a usable editor, but not now.

  This is rediculous -- just because something doesn't suit *your*
needs doesn't mean that it's "a waste of disk space".  What an
egocentric view -- perhaps the author doesn't care if his program
is used by whiners in the frozen north.  One of you even said that
it looked like a useable editor, but just because it lacks a feature
you want, that perhaps isn't needed by the target audience of the
programmer, it is basically trash.  The author's note said:

    Even though this is "shareware", the fee is only for an upgrade and
    custom versions. I will give support to anyone using it (As long as
    they call during reasonable hours <grin>). I just like to hear from the
    people who use it.

  That's about as reasonable as you can hope for, in my mind.  Did
you call him up or mail to him, asking if he might change it?  The
moderator said that it was "a reasonably useful package for light
editing needs."  He didn't mention anything about it being a panacea
for all editing woes.  Perhaps you should flame the moderator, not
the author, for not telling you about the 8th bit stuff.  I think
you should stop complaining, though, and try some constructive
criticism, or write your own editor that does what you want.  Personally,
I think it looks like a fine editing program -- but even if I hated it,
what good would flaming it here do me?

> Having looked into so many programs in moderating garbo archives, I
> can corroborate the concept that a significant portion of everything
> is crap.  Yes, seriously.  The number of badly written programs,
> weak or missing documentations, and useless on cryptic user
> interfaces is unbounded.  It is not possible to check everything,
> but I try to have some sort of a quality control on garbo, and not
> accept disgrace-quality programs.  I highly appreciate the work that
> Bill does, but I think that occasionally the c.b.i.p sieve leaks
> noticeably.  With Bill's workload I understand.  This is an
> observation, certainly not a flame. 

  Most of the programs posted are free; I think it's true usually that
you get what you pay for.  Documentation and user interfaces are the
two most commonly fouled up things in a program; however, did you even
try this program?  Were you talking about this program, echoing what
others had said about it, or just complaining in general?

 -- dan