kimhollamby
Unregistered
|
|
Our sincere thanks to all who have reported the occasional software error messages on this forum. They don't crash browsers or machines and can be overcome by using the back button on a browser but they are annoying and you won't have to live with them for much longer. Apologies for the inconvenience.
Also thanks for all the feedback. Our first priority was to restore these forums as quickly as possible, but further work is now being carried out this week and all registered users will receive a mail with further details of changes very soon.
|
MattS
Unregistered
|
|
I wonder if I might help out KH, who knows lots more about boats than me, but praps is evidently less experienced in the choppy waters of bulls*%#ting the users regarding forthcoming home-cooked software. This is especially difficult if you aren't or can't do the programming, but are to blame.
1. It is unwise for you to ever promise that the new version will do anything other than actually have a new version number. Limit your promises to specific things such as "it will do this". Do not promise that it'll be better because you'll find that half the users like the bit that you thought was a bug.
2. You should increase version numbers a little (from say 2.11 to 2.12) if it's a wholesale rewrite and you want to pretend otherwise, and of course increase version numbers in huge leaps (from say 2.11 to 2000) when sod all has been done, other than of course, change the version number. As software boss, you decide the version numbers.
3. Programmers will be developing at least two new versions going at the same time - the new one, and the one after that. This looks really industrious, and the software boss is really pleased that he's got such an ace team and may be lured into making announcements as you have done. However, having version 4 on the point of launch, whilst already talking of version 5 gives them a drop zone for hard bits (they'll go in version 5 of course) and an excuse for version 4 eventually being a bit manky, namely that their minds are now on version 5.
|
paul_lomax
Unregistered
|
|
1) Its not home cooked software.
2) The loss of features were an unwanted side effect of being forced to add our own routines which enforce registration before posting.
3) The version of the software before we modified it was 4.33; Last update June 8, 2000. No idea what the version number the previous board was, but it was circa '97.
4) If you want to bitch/blame at somebody, direct it at me, not Kim.
|
kimhollamby
Unregistered
|
|
Whilst I claim not to have all my stock tied up in this wonderful world of software, you'd better believe I've spent more than a humanly reasonable share of time in meetings, conferences, so on and so on dealing with version numbers, what they will (won't) do, functional specs, UATs blah blah and digital blah.
Tempered (bad) by the experience and also a victim, as many users, of the worldly goods offered by the computer industry inc Mac (see, you knew I was sad), PC and now thanks to this job, into the heady arena of....no, that's enough of that.
Does occur to me reading your mail that you could in fact add version numbers to boat models; the uncharitable might suggest that serial numbers are just that.
That said, I for one cannot wait until the next time I foresake the sheaves of paper carrying version number riddled functional specs in my paperless office in order to get afloat again. Found myself contemplating the boat ads - it's getting deperate!
Oh, by the way, we will improve it here. There we go again...
|
kimhollamby
Unregistered
|
|
Okay, on behalf of a team who are actually keen to do a good job and the many users who want to use this forum for boat-related postings, let's cool it here. Perhaps we are too honest for our own good, but that's the way I prefer to run things, as any MBM readers here will know.
Enough said?
|
matts
Unregistered
|
|
bit touchy paul! If you're writing software, that's called home-cooked in the software industry. My posting was humourous. KH heads up the team as I understand it. You needn't be too precious about software that nobody actually pays money for, and by the same token you needn't pay too much attention to the whingy postings, humourous or otherwise. I was warning against promising too much from a forthcoming new software version.
Seems you've reliably ignored or slapped down any ideas from contributors. You don't have time to prat about on the BB attempting to win non-arguments that weren't directed at you: the code isn't working so get on with it.
|
paul_lomax
Unregistered
|
|
Sorry, I didnt mean to come across as being touchy, was just trying to make sure everybody had the facts straight :)
And you're right, I need to ignore the forums and get back to coding...
*gone*
|
jfm
Unregistered
|
|
Kim, I'm going to say a polite no to that request. Censorship is too strong a word but it was headed that way. This forum IS what its users think and want to say. The comments made about this BB have been well-intentioned, polite and humorous imho. If people have stuff to say they should continue to say it. Complaints from your clients/customers are the very best feedback a business can ever get. Best regards. JM
|
matts
Unregistered
|
|
Most software moans are about speed. I note that you're constructing things differently in that the back button runs back thru the current thread, praps? Launch time of a new thread seems slower, but of subsequent postings it's as quick as it used to be or quicker.
In the past, with our software, we've had similar speed winges. What we did was, instead of going to get the info when asked, we first slammed up the header (which we have already from the list), and then went and got the contents. This "feels" loads quicker. Dunno if this any use.
|
Duncan
Unregistered
|
|
re version numbers - thought the boating industry did do this and you (kindly and most correctly imho) point this out with phrases such as 'the BIG42 has the BIG40 hull.....' and a bigger price tag.
Just trying to get this thread back on boats (but will admit to laughing at some earlier postings!)
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
