robf2@pyuxf.UUCP (robert fair) (01/28/88)
I recently bought the MSC 5.0 Optimizing Compiler on the strength of
Microsoft's ads.
I soon discovered, like most of the net, that lots of the so-called
optimizations are broken, e.g. intrinsic functions, loop optimizations.
By "broke" I mean that the compiler generates bad code which causes
programs to go into never-never land.
I followed Microsoft's directions for support, submitting test programs
showing the problem etc, and asking for an update.
Their reply arrived today, in short they admitted the compiler was
broke but they did not intend to fix it. Tough Shit.
So here I am having spent several $000 on a compiler which does not
perform as advertised and the manufacturer refuses to fix.
Does anyone have any suggestions where to go from here ?
I feel that Microsoft got me to buy MSC under false pretenses, since their
ad's claimed features which don't work, and Msoft refuses to make them work.
I know Msoft has a lousy reputation for support - if there are other
people out there with the same feelings as me maybe its time for
a group lawsuit. Bill Gates has got a damn sight too big for his boots !
--
Robert L. Fair Standard Disclaimer:
Bell Communications Research/CHC I speak for myself only.
Piscataway, NJ
{ihnp4,allegra}!pyuxww!pyuxf!robf2viking@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (01/30/88)
/* Written 9:55 am Jan 28, 1988 by robf2@pyuxf in iuvax:comp.sys.ibm.pc */ /* ---------- "MSC 5.0 Bugs, Microsoft ``support''" ---------- */ > I recently bought the MSC 5.0 Optimizing Compiler on the strength of > Microsoft's ads. > I soon discovered, like most of the net, that lots of the so-called > optimizations are broken, e.g. intrinsic functions, loop optimizations. > I followed Microsoft's directions for support, submitting test programs > showing the problem etc, and asking for an update. > Their reply arrived today, in short they admitted the compiler was > broke but they did not intend to fix it. Tough Shit. > Robert L. Fair Standard Disclaimer: > Bell Communications Research/CHC I speak for myself only. > Piscataway, NJ > {ihnp4,allegra}!pyuxww!pyuxf!robf2 Can you clarify Microsoft's response to your bug report? I've had much better luck with them in the past. Exact quotes from their letter would be more helpful than hyperbole in this case, and I'll see if I can get some answers from my buddies in Redmond, WA. I just purchased MSC 5.0 as well, so I'm concerned about the bugs.... Jon Backstrom Computer Science Department Indiana University ARPA: viking@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu Bloomington, IN 47405 UUCP: {pyramid,ihnp4,pur-ee,rutgers}!iuvax!viking
nortond@killer.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) (01/30/88)
In article <248@pyuxf.UUCP> robf2@pyuxf.UUCP (robert fair) writes: >I recently bought the MSC 5.0 Optimizing Compiler on the strength of >Microsoft's ads. Pretty slick ads, eh? >I followed Microsoft's directions for support, submitting test programs >showing the problem etc, and asking for an update. I saved time and phoned them directly about my problem. Before I told them what the problem was, I asked if they would provide me a fix if I found something new. They declined and I did not tell them about the bug. >So here I am having spent several $000 on a compiler which does not >perform as advertised and the manufacturer refuses to fix. > >Does anyone have any suggestions where to go from here ? Yes. Please tell the rest of us on the network about the problem. At least we can work around these bugs if we know about them. In your report, however, include a restrictive copyright notice particularly restricting Microsoft from using the report for internal use and bug-fixing. These bug reports are of very high commercial value to Microsoft. It does not seem like a fair trade to report a bug to them and have them turn around and profit by it without renumeration to the person who spent time diagnosing the problem. A month or so ago, I reported a bug in a MSC intrinsic which included such a copyright notice. If anyone has information which suggests that Microsoft or an employee of Microsoft has violated the license agreement, please inform me. >I feel that Microsoft got me to buy MSC under false pretenses, since their >ad's claimed features which don't work, and Msoft refuses to make them work. > >I know Msoft has a lousy reputation for support - if there are other >people out there with the same feelings as me maybe its time for >a group lawsuit. ... I would be interested in participating in such a "class-action" suit, but I am ignorant of such legal options. Anyone in misc.legal care to comment? -- Daniel A. Norton ...{lll-lcc,ptsfa,hplabs}!well!nortond 544 Cormorant Drive Voorhees, NJ 08043 609/751-7381
alleng@killer.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) (01/31/88)
In article <248@pyuxf.UUCP> robf2@pyuxf.UUCP (robert fair) writes: >I recently bought the MSC 5.0 Optimizing Compiler on the strength of >Microsoft's ads.... [explained that compiler was buggy, and he attempted >to get Microsoft to fix the problems]... >Their reply arrived today, in short they admitted the compiler was >broke but they did not intend to fix it. Tough Shit. > >So here I am having spent several $000 on a compiler which does not >perform as advertised and the manufacturer refuses to fix. > >Does anyone have any suggestions where to go from here ? Sure do! There is a law in Texas called the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. It allows the victim to recover thrice the damages plus $100 plus reasonable attorney's fees and court costs. I would suspect that most states had the same laws. A class action lawsuit sounds good, but you may have to prove that everyone was damaged (I believe). When you file the suit, this forces the Defendant to release records showing who has purchased the product. Then you are required to write them a letter. They are auto- matically included in the lawsuit, unless they write a letter and speci- fically request to be excluded. Your lawyer can tell you more. Try consulting the Federal Trade Commission (ATTN: The Secretary, Washington D.C.). If you bought the product from them through the mail, check with the postal inspectors. There are many avenues that you can pursue. Be creative! As for me, I will note that down, and will keep it in mind the next time we have need for a compiler. -- Allen Gwinn / email: {ihnp4!decvax!killer}!sulaco!allen \ USPS: P.O. Box 740444, Dallas, TX 75374-0444
swh@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (Steve Harrold) (02/03/88)
Re: Copyrighting bug reports The suggestion has been made to: "Please tell the rest of us on the network about the problem. At least we can work around these bugs if we know about them. In your report, however, include a restrictive copyright notice particularly restricting Microsoft from using the report for internal use and bug-fixing. These bug reports are of very high commercial value to Microsoft. It does not seem like a fair trade to report a bug to them and have them turn around and profit by it without renumeration to the person who spent time diagnosing the problem." Come, now! Isn't this a bit childish, like biting off your nose to spite your face? If you prohibit a vendor from using your bug report, you guarantee that 99% of the product's user community will never get the benefit of having the problem repaired. While I would rather have the problem fixed for no charge, I do prefer to have FIXED by some means, and hacking over the net is not that means. Besides, most users do not subscribe to this net. --------------------- Steve Harrold ...hplabs!hpsmtc1!swh HPG200/13 (408) 447-5580 ---------------------
hardin@hpindda.HP.COM (John Hardin) (02/04/88)
>The suggestion has been made to: > >>"Please tell the rest of us on the network about the problem. >>At least we can work around these bugs if we know about them. >>In your report, however, include a restrictive copyright notice >>particularly restricting Microsoft from using the report for internal >>use and bug-fixing. These bug reports are of very high commercial value >>to Microsoft. It does not seem like a fair trade to report a bug to >>them and have them turn around and profit by it without renumeration >>to the person who spent time diagnosing the problem." > >Come, now! Isn't this a bit childish, like biting off your nose to spite >your face? > >--------------------- >Steve Harrold ...hplabs!hpsmtc1!swh Seems to me that the original poster is not out of line at all. If we (the user community) are having a problem with an arrogant and unhelpful vendor, we have very few options to remedy the situation. If the vendor is allowed to engage in this behavior with impunity, we can expect no change in the behavior. Clearly, the best message one can send to such a vendor is simply to buy someone elses product. Many times, however, this not a viable option due to some other considerations like compatability with other vendor's products or your company's decision to standardize on a particular compiler, operating system, windowing environment, etc. A hostile and uncooperative user community may eventually bring about a change in the behavior of the offending vendor. Surely we should only refrain from any action only if we are satisfied with the current state of affairs. Many times it is better to promote change by letting a bad system fail than to help it keep limping along. (Why do I keep thinking about South Africa as I write this? :-) ) John Hardin
swh@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (Steve Harrold) (02/05/88)
Re: Arrogant vendors My earlier remark about the childishness of copyrighting bug reports to make life hard for a vendor is still valid. I fully subscribe to the idea that a user community should make its wishes known to a vendor and recognize that choice of vendor may be limited. What I wanted to point out is that the tactic of copyrighting bug reports doesn't hurt the vendor, only the user community who will be deprived of an eventual fix. Bear in mind that most copies (99.44%) of the product in question (MSC) will be repaired via "update" from the vendor and not by readers of this news topic. --------------------- Steve Harrold ...hplabs!hpsmtc1!swh HPG200/13 (408) 447-5580 ---------------------