Attacking the software/developers that use it fall under the same aegis - especially if they are coders on the site. A little vitriol can really hurt a developer's livelihood for our own personal bias...
-wraith808
I think if you reread what I wrote, you will discover that I have not, at any point, 'attacked' (your word) either OC or the developers that use it - either here at DoCo - or out in the 'wild.'
If you look at any of my previous comments, at no point will you ever see me say (or imply) that a developer doesn't have the right to get into bed with OC. Or that doing so proves they are a bad person. Or that people shouldn't trust them, or use their software, because they incorporated OC's DLL in their installer.
I
did suggest that it might not turn out be quite what it appeared in the long run. But I also extended a very sincere wish to Renegade that it would work out well for him and his customers. So if I am 'attacking' anybody for using OC, I'd appreciate being shown exactly
where I did. Because I looked and I can't find it.
I also openly acknowledged my initial lack of understanding of the product, and asked a number of fairly direct and specific questions about it. Many of which went unanswered in any real sense.
I have challenged OC's refusal to consider their software as a type of adware. But despite that, I edited one of my comments - and acknowledged within it a complaint from Renegade that it contained erroneous terminology - after which I gave him the floor to clarify things for us.
I have questioned OC's business practices for what I consider less than forthright behavior. I have questioned their
bone fides. And I have repeatedly stated that my primary problem with the software isn't what it
does but how it goes about
doing it. And that it represented an attempt to change our ideas of what should be considered
acceptable behavior on the part of a software installer by OC's refusal to have it display a splash screen and ask for the customer's ok before it runs.
I even went so far as to offer what I thought was the business motivation for doing it that way ($$$ - what else?), and to date, have not had anybody from OC challenge my assessment. Which leads me to conclude I was spot on. Especially since they have at least one person in their organization actively monitoring web discussions of their product - and that person has been a participant in this thread. So it's not like they don't know what's being said here.
I responded to the challenge that OC does
not install anything by offering for consideration the definition I learned (before PCs ruled the world) to clarify where I was coming from when I said it did. The definition of "install" was not presented as gospel truth, but rather for the purposes of discussion. And for which I received a sarcastic and rather insulting reply.
But I still don't see
anyplace in my previous comment, or any of the earlier ones in this thread, where I'm attacking
anybody.
If I have been "vitriolic" and "sarcastic" (I prefer to think of it more as being "passionate" and "pithy" BTW
) it was largely directed towards the 'on air' advertising practices of the cable television industry. And for
that I offer no apologies whatsoever.
Perhaps I did indulge in some excess here in my attempt to sound a cautionary note:
OC is gonna be totally different.
Really.
They have given us their word.
Forget they have serious venture funding - and are actively trying to get as many developers as possible into the fold without drawing too much attention to it.
And forget about some of its developer's past track records.
We all make mistakes.
Like getting caught. tongue
So let's just let bygones be bygones - and "put it behind us" as the saying goes.
But I thought it might be a little less offensive than coming right out and saying what I initially wrote right after:
OC is gonna be totally different. I originally just said
Bullshit and ended it there.
And I will agree that that following comment would have been better left unsaid:
That's the perfect place to stick it anyway.
It's already sounding less funny to me than it originally did.
Where I did err, however was in implying Renegade said, at some point, that end users were both "stupid" and "clueless." He did not say that, even though I sensed that was what he thought from some other comments, both in this thread, and a few others.
Needless to say, my intuiting doesn't justify my creating a "composite" comment that could be confused with a direct quote.
So for that, I
do apologize.
