🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8B12576.0094...@swcbbs.com>,
JEFF LACKEY <jeff....@swcbbs.com> wrote:
>Its a bit ironic that there are two major threads that run at the same 
>time here, for various companies and games:
>
>1. "(Major Software Company) missed their release date again - they 
>promised a couple of months ago (much anticipated game) would be out 
>this Tuesday, and it wasn't at the store!  Those lying, worthless, 
>SOBs, they just don't care about us - they just can't be trusted - the 
>hell with them!"
>
>2. "I can't believe (Major Software Company) released this (much 
>anticipated game) with all of these bugs still in it!  It would have 
>been so much better if they had fixed these problems before they 
>released it - I'll never buy anything from those SOBs again - they just 
>can't be trusted - the hell with them!"
>
>tough crowd!
>

Too right.  There is of course a simple solution to this problem for the
software companies:  stop announcing release dates before the product is
even in beta testing.  That way, there won't be as much pressure on to
go ahead and release it "on time", with several major and dozens of minor
bugs still in the software.  If a bug is detected, it should be fixed
before the software is released, not after-- and most especially not for
an "upgrade fee".

There is also a workable, thoroughly cynical solution to this conflict, for
the software buyer:  never buy a software packaged that's released "on time",
and never believe a scheduled release date for software you want to see.  I
follow this strategy religiously, and I've never been disappointed yet.  Of
course, my expectations aren't exactly high...  :-)

- Bill (ha...@midway.uchicago.edu)