Recent Posts4826
General Software Discussion / Re: Check&Get support blows chunks
« Last post by Darwin on August 30, 2007, 09:57 AM »But even if the software is paid for, I object to seeing us call a piece of software "shitware", even as a joke, because we didnt get an answer after 3 weeks... it feels unfair.
Fair comment and guilty as charged. I regret making the off the cuff remark about shitware (to clarify, I had been thinking about the shitty support forum on the shitware site, not the software one, but no matter) in my previous post - Check&Get is anything but shitware, it is a very fine piece of software and in the past I have a number of very pleasant e-mail exchanges with the author, so I am beginning to suspect that your observations about spam may be correct.
While I accept the argument that spam may be the culprit here, and that I may be dealing with a single person developing Check&Get (I am certain that I am), I don't feel that it is unreasonable for an end-user to expect to be able to reach the developer and to receive a reply. My initial message was sent through the official website's support via a form for that purpose complete with my registration details, which should have warranted at least a canned response letting me know that it was received. Admittedly, I was redirected after submission to a "thank you" page, but nothing to my e-mail address. Surely, the inclusion of my registration details - entered into a discrete field on the form - should have been enough to elevate the message from "likely spam" to "likely spam that should be manually checked and verified before being deleted forever"? Now, the message may have been received, read, and the issues raised even added to a "to do list", but I am firmly of the belief that if someone takes the time to write and suggest improvements to your product, with the intention of improving the product and making it a more attractive option for future consumers, a reply is required, even if only to say thank you for the suggestions.
I would genuinely like to see Check&Get continue to be developed and improved, ie this wasn't intended to be a petulant snivel suggesting that the application is crap because it doesn't do what I want it to do - I love using it already and merely sought to provide my informed input, as a long-time daily user, to make it even better. This does not in any way mean that it is not a solid, reliable, application as it stands. Look at the strides made between Check&Get 2 - reviewed in the DC Website monitoring review - and Check&Get 3. I believe that Ken and I have made a number of suggestions that, if implemented progressively over a number of future builds, would result in an app that represents an equally great step forward over the current version. I am also of the opinion (based in no way on any knowledge of, or expertise in, coding!) that the majoirty of the changes that we have mentioned are not significant from a developmental perspective. I accept, of course, that I may be very naive in asserting this. Nevertheless, there it is...
I suspect that this argument, if carried forward, would look very much like the "software piracy is acceptable vs. Software piracy is unacceptable" argument that comes up from time to time on DC and goes around in circles.
).
. Grrr... Hear me roar!
for RSS, even this actually kept me wed to OE for about a year beyond when I knew I should make the change... Just my take on this...