Board index » delphi » Re: Here we go again -- problems

Re: Here we go again -- problems


2007-07-19 01:52:38 AM
delphi154
Quote
Complete downloadable zip files with the full install
Hey, let me be exclude from the install stuff like rave or crystal or
netmasters or whatever other {*word*99} I don't need.
Other than that, I agree with you thankyouverymuch
Lucian
 
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Lucian Radulescu writes:
Quote
Hey, let me be exclude from the install stuff like rave or crystal or
netmasters or whatever other {*word*99} I don't need.
Our installer lets you control exactly what does and doesn't get
installed, (excluding the pre-requisites, of course)
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager - CodeGear
blogs.codegear.com/nickhodges
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Quote
Our installer lets you control exactly what does and doesn't get
I know that. I have just shown a very faint disagreement on one point
with the poster :-)
Quote
installed, (excluding the pre-requisites, of course)
In any case, shouldn't the installer check the pre-reqs and let you
know if it is ok to continue (or fail otherwise)?
Lucian
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Lucian Radulescu writes:
Quote
In any case, shouldn't the installer check the pre-reqs and let you
know if it is ok to continue (or fail otherwise)?
Not sure what you mean here -- the installer won't install prereqs that
you already have.
--
Nick Hodges
Delphi Product Manager - CodeGear
blogs.codegear.com/nickhodges
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Quote
Not sure what you mean here -- the installer won't install prereqs
that you already have.
"check" as in "detect" if you have all the stuff, and than let you know
if it found everything, or else
Lucian
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

XXXX@XXXXX.COM writes:
Quote
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:16:18 +0200, Bruno Fierens [tmssoftware.com]
<XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:

>If you'd base your decision to install software
>on problem reports in support newsgroups, you'll
>probably never install any new software.

I know I have said this before, but i can not help myself.
in fact most of the software i ever encountered wasn't having as bad
installer as Delphi has. There are qualitatively different complaints
to delphi installation and any other installations. it is the
differnece between 'the installation didn't even start' and 'it
placed icon on the desktop even if i didn't ask for it'. I must say
that I am really amazed by that. I tried to install all my drivers,
webservers, db servers - and whoa it *does install*, and then i try
to install delphi and get bogus messages like 'unable to start
command line', 'file does not exits', 'radiobutton group error' and
whoa it doesn't even start, if i take into account that delphi
doesn't install any services, drivers, system upgrades, and it still
failes miserably - well i just can not belive it. And no i won't dare
to try to install D2007, I am happy that my BDS2006 (which overall
took more than 20hours to install) is still running, and it's
problems like this which quite clearly tell me that the improvement
in the installation procedures is close to zero over the past
1/2year. And no, it is not a question of 'one thing doesn't work',
it's a question of 'neither of the things does work'. If you hadn't
any problems with your installation then you must be lucky, but
belive it or not, if you would encounter a problem, it would not
definitelly end up with one problem, it would be dozens.

Regards,
Ondrej
Ondrej, I suggest you try installing the latest Delphi 2007 - then contact me
directly if you have any issues. it is been improved considerably since
initial release.
We ran several hundred install tests before releasing Cogswell. The
internet based install works great, there are several new options for
finding 'lost' files if they are missing, and you can decide to install
the cache files (which I highly recommend since patching in the future
requires them).
If anyone is using the latest Update 1 set of files and is still
running into any problems - contact me directly and/or log a QC report.
A QC report would be appreciated so we can have a constructive
discussion, screenshots and I can easily provide the information to the
install team as required.
--
Chris Pattinson
CodeGear QA Manager, Delphi/C++ Developer Studio
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

"Rimvydas Paulavicius" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Of course this has no impact on piracy at all

www.paulita.lt/Img/Delphi2007.jpg
Wow! And they've completely cracked Vista, so that it continues to
auto-update without raising alarms. It makes one wonder why they bother with
this elaborate rubbish. A simple encrypted licence file which denotes the
user and company using the product, coupled with these details emblazoned on
every report and in the version info of any executable produced. that is all
you need to do. Anything else is overkill and is usually cracked within
weeks of release, or makes things really inconvenient for lawful, paying
customers.
--
Mark Jacobs
www.jacobsm.com
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Nick Hodges (CodeGear) writes:
Quote
You can not begin to comprehend the frustration I have with users seeing
the standard ASP.NET error message. That is totally unacceptable.
Then you should be totally ecstatic now, right? And you will be pointing
out that these no longer show up as vociferously as you've been griping
about them? I did it just for you Nick.
--
John Kaster blogs.codegear.com/johnk
CodeGear Developer Network: dn.codegear.com
Features and bugs: qc.codegear.com
Got source? cc.codegear.com
If it is not here, it is not happening: ec.codegear.com
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

IanH writes:
Quote
Sorry, I took your frustration with this "totally unacceptable"
situation to mean that it was out of your control.
Actually, Nick could have done something about it himself if it
bothered him that much. He still has the access.
Be that as it may, I have now finally had the time to go back and put
exception trapping on that application. For the record, the majority of
our systems have had graceful exception reporting for quite some time.
I've been busy on far more important things than making the error
report look pretty. Elimination of the actual errors themselves is
always going to be of much higher importance to me.
--
John Kaster blogs.codegear.com/johnk
CodeGear Developer Network: dn.codegear.com
Features and bugs: qc.codegear.com
Got source? cc.codegear.com
If it is not here, it is not happening: ec.codegear.com
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

John Kaster (CodeGear) writes:
Quote
Our download system for trials and turbos just got tremendously
simpler. Delphi Developer downloads is next.
Nice work John.
Looks pretty too.
--
Robin.
Australian Bridal Accessories := www.bridalbuzz.com.au
Turbo for Noobs (a work in progress) := turbofornoobs.blogspot.com/
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Robin writes:
Quote
Nice work John.
Thanks. It wasn't just me ... we had representatives from every
function in the company taking a hard look at this process to make it
as friendly and intuitive as possible. There were all kinds of moving
parts to juggle to make this change, and it was absolutely non trivial,
although on the surface it would seem very simple.
Quote
Looks pretty too.
Glad you think so. I am sure there will be others who think it looks
horrible. ;)
--
John Kaster blogs.codegear.com/johnk
CodeGear Developer Network: dn.codegear.com
Features and bugs: qc.codegear.com
Got source? cc.codegear.com
If it is not here, it is not happening: ec.codegear.com
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

John Kaster (CodeGear) writes:
Quote
IanH writes:

>Sorry, I took your frustration with this "totally unacceptable"
>situation to mean that it was out of your control.

Actually, Nick could have done something about it himself if it
bothered him that much. He still has the access.

Be that as it may, I have now finally had the time to go back and put
exception trapping on that application. For the record, the majority of
our systems have had graceful exception reporting for quite some time.
I've been busy on far more important things than making the error
report look pretty. Elimination of the actual errors themselves is
always going to be of much higher importance to me.

As the OP for this thread, I hate to say it, but...
here we go again...
John, once again, you demonstrate that you should NOT be in a position
called 'Developer Relations'.
I just don't think you get it. This is not a mutually exclusive
situation. it is not a matter of the errors need to be fixed, and the
perception of errors be damned, or vice versa. They BOTH need to be fixed.
If your public face turns away users, they're never going to find out
about the problems under the hood. If you have a great public persona,
but have hidden problems that don't get fixed, you won't keep the
customers you get.
If you (personally) are overloaded with work and other tasks, and these
types of things are being done on a 'volunteer' or 'semi-volunteer'
basis, then you all might as well pack up and go home -- if the basic
functions of providing an interface to the customers, without pissing
them off, is beyond CodeGear's ability to budget and pay for, you folks
shouldn't be in business.
I recognize that you're overloaded, I recognize the years of effort
you've put in, but when it has sunk to the level of you public pissing
on other co-workers such as Nick, it is gone beyond the pale. If you
hadn't said anything, I (for one) wouldn't have known that you were even
'involved' in this process -- I'd have assumed that some faceless
CodeGear drone would be yelled at and that the task would be
accomplished. Instead, it is degenerated into a pissing match, and
you're trying to one-up Nick with who's the more
overworked/underappreciated among CodeGear employees. Don't think that
we (end users) don't know that you're (collectively and individually)
overworked and under the gun, but you guys signed up for it (personally,
I'm not sure I'd have -- on the other hand, there've been times I'd
have swept floors just to stay employed <G>).
Lighten up, and just as others have commented (both privately and
publicly) that I should do the same, I'd point out that my job title
DOESN'T include the words 'Developer Relations'...
David Erbas-White
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Farshad writes:
Quote
Problem with *initial user experience* starts at the very first stage
where a potential customer is forced to register for a Trial Key
before he can try a product.
We have just launched a new trial download system that makes this about
as painless as it can be. You just fill out your email, first and last
name, country, language you want installation instructions in, and
click a button to get the email.
If you missed the email, you can just go to the page and click the
button again.
Furthermore, the download links are ALWAYS available. Not hidden behind
anything.
And another thing, some things like Turbo JBuilder don't require
registration at all.
cc.codegear.com/free/turbojbuilder
--
John Kaster blogs.codegear.com/johnk
CodeGear Developer Network: dn.codegear.com
Features and bugs: qc.codegear.com
Got source? cc.codegear.com
If it is not here, it is not happening: ec.codegear.com
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

John Kaster (CodeGear) writes:
Quote
Thanks. It wasn't just me ... we had representatives from every
function in the company taking a hard look at this process to make it
as friendly and intuitive as possible. <snip>
Then thanks to everyone involved :-)
Quote
Glad you think so. I am sure there will be others who think it looks
horrible. ;)
Can't please em' all.
"I don't know the secret of success, but the secret of failure is trying
to please everybody."
--Bill Cosby
--
Robin.
Australian Bridal Accessories := www.bridalbuzz.com.au
Turbo for Noobs (a work in progress) := turbofornoobs.blogspot.com/
 

Re: Here we go again -- problems

Robin writes:
Quote
"I don't know the secret of success, but the secret of failure is
trying to please everybody."

--Bill Cosby
Excellent quote I hadn't seen before. Thanks.
--
John Kaster blogs.codegear.com/johnk
CodeGear Developer Network: dn.codegear.com
Features and bugs: qc.codegear.com
Got source? cc.codegear.com
If it is not here, it is not happening: ec.codegear.com