OT: Java versions (was Re: Final Notice: Meeting Today at 4pmEDT - New Room URL)

[Fairlight]

>From inside the gravity well of a singularity, John Esak shouted:
> 
> I don't think it was Ryan who "started" anything of the nature you just did

Actually, I was responding to Ken, not Ryan.  Just keeping the facts
straight.

> here. My only comment is that you should have stayed around and made these
> comments vocally at the meeting. Why do it now in this rather cowardly way?

I don't think it's cowardly.  AFAIK, Bud is still subbed to this list, and
can read my comments at his leisure.

> Sorry, Mark, but you had as much chance as anyone to say anything you wanted
> today, but you chose to leave. Why do it now? What's the point? 

The point is that I didn't feel like starting something that would have
taken up everyone's time in realtime, nor starting a bit of a heated debate
in your forum.  I was trying to show some respect for your wishes not to
turn it into anything even partly nasty.  I heard a bunch of rhetoric from
Bud about the features/target market thing, felt it sounded like a lot of
excuses I didn't have the patience for, and left rather than subject anyone
to my (at the time) not so wonderful mood, combined with utter disdain for
his explanations.  In short, I wasn't impressed, and if past experience is
anything, my comments to him (in -any- forum) would be like talking to
studious brick--it might -look- like it's paying attention, but it's in one
ear, out the other.  That's just my personal experience and impression,
which may or may not reflect reality.

Now, if you'd like me to have said as much yesterday, you should have given
me advance permission to let my hair down.  I was trying to behave, be
diplomatic, and in the end, simply remove myself from a situation in which
I would cause consternation for others.  The difference here is that
someone can delete my message, ignore it, or whatever.  It might be
archived, but it's not part of a larger picture in .wmv or .mp3 format that
someone -must- listen through.  In that manner, be happy I made the choice
I did.  I'd have been less than complimentary, and you stated over a month
ago that you didn't want a bitch-fest when the day came.  I complied, John.

I've already talked to Bud privately in the past.  Rehashing things in
public would serve no good purpose and would only waste time and flare
tempers.  Certainly with in the mood I was in, as I don't get anywhere in
that mood unless I turn up the heat--which I didn't want to do.

Besides...where is it written that the only time you can discuss Bud or
the company's direction is in one scheduled conversation in one particular
forum, (much as I like the forum)?  It's not.  As I said, he's free to read
this.  I just don't see the cowardly part, since I'm willing to put it out
here.  

> And as far as you changing the version number on OneGate and everyone
> going into any kind of uproar... well, can 3 or 4 people make an uproar?

It's 8, actually, and about to be 9, maybe 10 with any good luck.  But when
it hits the fan, -one- is all it takes in my mind.  If someone releases
-anything-, no matter how large or small the user base, and it's lacking in
compelling features for the upgrade price, and bumped up in version number
strictly for the purposes of making it look better than it is--well then I
consider that poor policy at best, unethical and dishonest at worst.

> There are thousands of people using filePro, and hundreds of developers,
> and you still have yet to produce such a winner. To compare version
> numbers between it and OneGate is rather funny. Gave me a pretty good
> laugh. So, if you are going to make nasty comments, be prepared to hear
> some back. Seem fair to you?

It's not the direct product comparison that's at issue.  I said it was
hyperbole anyway.  The real issue is the same as when word processors get
released with major version number changes and nothing much has changed
unless you're -really- deep into the finer minutia of word processing.
Corel did it, as did WP before them.  MS has done it with Word.  Adobe
seems to do it with Photoshop, and it's impossible to tell which is a
genuine "must have" major release and which is out there just to make more
money.  I mean, I've seen some products that -really- milk their franchise
for cash before.  Westwood Studios was king at that.  I've never seen a
company milk something to death like they did.  Thankfully EA bought them
out and revitalised the franchise in question with -real- changes.

I'm broadly asserting that version numbers should -mean something- again,
no matter what is being released.  If I'm still hearing people complaining
about 5.0 not having much over 4.8, I can imagine how well 5.6 will go
over.  But that's not my problem.  It'll either succeed or fail.  I'd bet
against it unless it's compelling though--something I've told Bud in
private at a previous date.  Now if he thinks that the >2gig limit raise
and the few other things they're putting in constitute a 5.0->5.6 jump and
can make it fly, more power to him.  My personal opinion is that it will be
greeted with some bitterness by at least a fair amount of people, along
with comments like, "That's -it-?  That's all they added, these few things?
I wish I could get my money back."  That's assuming they buy into it at
all, which is always a calculated risk, of course.  But the 5.0 adoption
curve wasn't so hot as I talk to more people and get the bigger picture.  I
still know a LOT of people, good solid developers, on 4.8 or even 4.5.

I felt my original comment was a bit bitter, and a -little- biting.  I
didn't think it was outright nasty.  I'm sorry you did.  And I don't feel
you made any nasty comments my way, either.  I can tell you were less than
pleased, but we've both had worse conversations.

No hard feelings on my end.  None whatsoever.  I was seriously trying to
respect your wishes, and I didn't have the patience to be diplomatic at the
time--and it only got worse with each sentence I heard.  Finally my fingers
just hit Alt-F4 in desperation.

mark->