eric@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Eric Lavitsky) (12/17/86)
I tried an I tried, but bloody netnews screwed me over anyway. What follows is the text from my original article... Eric ------------ Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Hippo Software woes (WARNING: FLAMING LETTER) Summary: forwarded message (and a flame!) References: <1524@druhi.UUCP> Reply-To: eric@ulysses.UUCP (Eric Lavitsky) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill Keywords: DON'T BUY ANYTHING FROM HIPPOPOTAMUS SOFTWARE! In article <1524@druhi.UUCP> med@druhi.UUCP writes: > >For those of you who like to see the punch line before you start: > > DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, PURCHASE ANY PIECE OF SOFTWARE > OR HARDWARE FROM HIPPOPOTAMUS SOFTWARE OF LOS GATOS, CA. > >Now for the reasons why: > > On August 1, this year, I was foolish enough to purchase an EPROM >programmer from Hippopotamus Software from a very reputable mail order >company. After receiving it a week later, I discovered that the only >operation that this programmer could do was to verify that EPROMS were >erased (really functional, huh :-( ). So, I called up Hippopotamus and >asked what the policy was. They indicated that they had discovered some >hardware and software problems with the programmer recently, and asked if >I would send both back to them for repair. So I did. > And now, for the sake of inews: - He goes on to say how after 8 weeks, he got it back and it did the exact same thing.. he calls the developer who calimed they found yet another problem and that he should send the unit in again... > Well, call me a fool, I sent it back to them again. And I am waiting >again. So after a few more weeks, I called to see what the #$%^ is going on. >The phone rings about 20 times, and I finally get ahold of an answering service. >They politely talk my message, and indicate that I should receive a call the >next day. Well, I didn't. Another call Monday, a lot more persistent with a >threat of legal action, again no call. Today I called, and the answering >service has been transformed into a mechanical answering machine that >indicates that your message will be delivered in one day (sure, and I was >born yesterday). > > I think that you could probably read between the lines and suspect >that Hippopotamus Software is out of business (or showing really bad signs >of being there soon). My advice is to not purchase ANY of their products, >PERIOD. If they owe you money or product, it may already be too late. > > I don't really know what my options are now, and would appreciate any >help that those of you in Netland might provide. I feel a lot better just >getting this off my chest, and if it helps even one person out there, I will >consider this a success. > > Myron I've posted this to comp.sys.amiga 'cos Hippo folks have advertised for the Amiga or appeared in Amiga buyers guides. Of course, if you ever looked at what they offered and for what price, you probably would have laughed anyway :-) This is a definite problem though, there have been several companies who have cashed checks and credit payments without any product to ship - caveat emptor! Gee, I bet netnews is gonna try and barf on this since we just got 2.11 up on ulysses, so why don't I add something else useful at the end of this message? But then again, why should I? Just because some lousy piece of software wants to impose some god-awfull arbitary limit on the amount of "included" text I can have in a message? This silly rule obviously doesn't apply in this instance, since the message is being forwarded from one group to another for it's relevant subject matter... (sigh). Oh well, guess I'll have to ask someone to locally comment out the code that does this... Eric Gillian: What's with netnews? Kirk: It's done too much LDS... Will Someone Please Fix inews !!! -- ARPA: Lavitsky@RED.RUTGERS.EDU UUCP: ...ulysses!eric ...caip!topaz!eric ...hplabs!well!lavitsky
kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan) (08/13/87)
Netland: We won't mention any names here, so as not to violate a repeated request from the victim for not flaming the villains in the piece, but I request all of you who are in a position to make buy/don't buy decisions on graphics hardware software systems to keep right at the forefront of your mind the recent example of bullying the little guy into submission we have seen here, and do your very best not to deal with, or let your companies get sucked into dealing with, the bad guys in this disagreement. You know their behavior here is completely representative of their corporate mindset, and that entering any business agreement with them will eventually be an unpleasant experience, right? Losing business is one (painful, but just) way of learning how to behave in polite society. Just for your information, the last crowd to gain the ire of you, me, and the rest of the world-wide nets, Technisoft, has gone bankrupt, and owners of the RAM-Board have received letters from the liquidators promising gobs of support (Ha!). I laughed and cried, since I'm now the proud owner of an orphan, but the business practices which others and I detailed over the net could lead to no other conclusion. I'm glad you all listened and bought elsewhere. Net power! Let it be heard again! They can't say they weren't warned! Kent, the (highly irritable) man from xanth.
sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) (08/14/87)
In article <2093@xanth.UUCP> kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >Losing business is one (painful, but just) way of learning how to >behave in polite society. That's right. In a year or two, a company I work for is looking at getting a high-end (~$60,000) graphics workstation to process high speed videotapes. The final decision is not mine, but my recommedation will probably be at least 80% of it. Guess what graphics firm we'll specifically avoid because of their attitude? You're right! They've kissed a potential $60,000 goodbye. Poof. Just goes to show, it pays to be nice. Sean -- -- Sean Casey sean@ms.uky.edu, {uunet,cbosgd}!ukma!sean -- (the Empire guy) sean@ms.uky.csnet, sean@UKMA.BITNET -- "I...am a shrubber..." -- The Shrubber
dca@toylnd.UUCP (David C. Albrecht) (08/14/87)
In article <2093@xanth.UUCP>, kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > We won't mention any names here, so as not to violate a repeated > request from the victim for not flaming the villains in the piece, but > I request all of you who are in a position to make buy/don't buy > decisions on graphics hardware software systems to keep right at the > forefront of your mind the recent example of bullying the little guy > into submission we have seen here, and do your very best not to deal > with, or let your companies get sucked into dealing with, the bad guys > in this disagreement. You know their behavior here is completely > representative of their corporate mindset, and that entering any > business agreement with them will eventually be an unpleasant > experience, right? > > Losing business is one (painful, but just) way of learning how to > behave in polite society. Oh give me a break. I sat through all these ridiculous flames against Pixar but I finally got my fill. Imagine that we have a role reversal here. Imagine that Leo's bread and butter is some sort of video production. Imagine that Leo gives a pre-release demo to a bunch of people. Imagine that one of those people from some faceless corporation sees some ideas he likes in the demo and copys some of the key concepts. Imagine that the corporation has access to faster and wider distribution channels and issues the knock-off before Leo gets to distribute his. Imagine that the corporation though their effort is not anywhere the same quality as Leo's still manages to fairly effectively steal Leo's thunder. I ask you, if you were the victim in this imaginary exercise how would YOU feel. I for one would be royally pissed off. Certainly, that would be the last time that person sat in on one of my pre-release screenings. Just because on person in this scenario is a 'faceless' corporation while the other is a frequent contributor to this group and he also happened to use a machine that we all know and love is still no excuse for his actions. Never mind copyright (I don't think Pixar has a leg to stand on either) just put yourself in the place of the hard working people who produced this demo. Mind you, I have nothing against Leo, he seems like a real nice guy. But, I think his actions in this case were thoughtless. I think he let his creative energies run away with his reason. The timing was all important here. If he had imitated the Luxo lamp demo which has long been distributed and milked for all it was worth I think that we wouldn't have heard a peep from Pixar, then it really would have been more flattering than annoying. It was using a demo that hadn't even been released yet that was really irritating. Pixar isn't a monolithic AI project, there are people within Pixar give them a little credit for possessing the same kind of emotions that Leo would feel in the same situation. Given the environment of this group it is easy to paint Pixar black and Leo white, it takes a little more maturity to realize that Pixar might have some reason to be a little upset. Hopefully, this whole thing will blow over with no one particularly damaged by the whole affair. I do hope, however, Leo may have gained a little wisdom which he seemed to be lacking heretofor. David Albrecht I have absolutely no association with Pixar. and yes I have my asbestos suit on and mailbox ready.
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (08/19/87)
In article <7091@g.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: >That's right. In a year or two, a company I work for is looking at getting >a high-end (~$60,000) graphics workstation to process high speed videotapes. >The final decision is not mine, but my recommedation will probably be at >least 80% of it. Guess what graphics firm we'll specifically avoid because >of their attitude? You're right! They've kissed a potential $60,000 goodbye. So just who *is* the competition for this unnamed company? And does their product come with a C compiler? Keith Doyle # {ucbvax,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd # cadovax!keithd@ucla-locus.arpa Contel Business Systems 213-323-8170 "The more equal social conditions become, the more men [people] display this reciprocal disposition to oblige each other." - De Tocqueville
richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton) (08/19/87)
In article <7091@g.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: > >That's right. In a year or two, a company I work for is looking at getting >a high-end (~$60,000) graphics workstation to process high speed videotapes. >The final decision is not mine, but my recommedation will probably be at >least 80% of it. Guess what graphics firm we'll specifically avoid because >of their attitude? You're right! They've kissed a potential $60,000 goodbye. > >Poof. Same situation here... -- Richard Sexton INTERNET: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM UUCP: {akgua, hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard "It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."
stergios@rocky.STANFORD.EDU (Stergios Marinopoul) (08/21/87)
In article <1696@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes: >In article <7091@g.ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes: <edited> >>Guess what graphics firm we'll specifically avoid because >>of their attitude? You're right! They've kissed a potential $60,000 goodbye >So just who *is* the competition for this unnamed company? And does their >product come with a C compiler? > AT&T thats who. Their new "Pixel Machine" should do quite well. Considering they put ray tracing (sp) ability in HARDWARE, and other goodies they just might have a winner here. As for the C compiler, well, the history books on C have already been written! -- % UUCP: !decwrl!rocky.stanford.edu!stergios % % ARPA: f.flex@othello.stanford.edu % % USnail: Crothers Memorial #690, Stanford, CA. 94305 % % Pa Bell: (415) 326-9051 %
lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Christopher Lishka) (08/21/87)
In article <158@toylnd.UUCP> dca@toylnd.UUCP (David C. Albrecht) writes: >Oh give me a break. I sat through all these ridiculous flames against >Pixar but I finally got my fill. Imagine that we have a role reversal >here. Imagine that Leo's bread and butter is some sort of video >production. Imagine that Leo gives a pre-release demo to a bunch of >people. Imagine that one of those people from some faceless corporation >sees some ideas he likes in the demo and copys some of the key concepts. >Imagine that the corporation has access to faster and wider distribution >channels and issues the knock-off before Leo gets to distribute his. >Imagine that the corporation though their effort is not anywhere the >same quality as Leo's still manages to fairly effectively steal Leo's >thunder. I ask you, if you were the victim in this imaginary exercise >how would YOU feel. I for one would be royally pissed off. Certainly, >that would be the last time that person sat in on one of my pre-release >screenings. (oh, why am I doing this again ?) One small point. Although it may not make anyone feel any better, I think there would be a slight bit of difference here. Mr. Schwab, in creating his demo, probably did not have very many intentions of making money off his demo (I am conjecturing here). Maybe he wanted a little personal glory and fame, but among Amigans he actually already has that. So what did he have to gain from his demo in the end? Maybe make a few jaws drop in amazement, or make a few eyes sparkle and guts laugh (how corny ;-), but it was not like he was about to make loads of cash or gain a lot of fame from it (something which he *already* had...well, at east the fame...). So, when a corporation goes and steals something a person (say, anyone reading this article) because it is a good idea, what do they have to gain? If they don't do much except show it to friends, they probably are not gaining all that much. I don't think that is bad. If they start using it as a demo to sell their machines, they have quite a bit to gain in terms of sales. That would *really* annoy me, 'cause they have stolen someone elses creation to sell their machines (hmmm...sounds familiar...big, checkered, bouncing, beach balls comes to mind...). I do not know for sure if Mr. Schwab had making any real fame off his demo, but I doubt it. Probably, what was wrong about what he did was he displayed it in a booth at Siggraph, and that was taken as an advertising statement for the Videoscape(tm) company (I belive it is Aegis (tm...)) by someone passing by. If he hadn't done that, there probably wouldn't have been as much controversy. He also did this before Red's Dream (tm, copyright, whatever else...) was actually released, which did step on some Pixar (tm, copyright, ...) employees toes. I don't blame them for being annoyed. I do blame them for restricting the distribution as they much as they did, although maybe they thought it would be used to sell Amiga products (which is NOT an unreasonable assumption). Personally, the more I think about it, the more I think that Mr. Schwab did the right thing by following Pixar's (tm, foobar, glarch, whatever) wishes. Hopefully he will create another demo that will give us an idea of what he did, and we will all be happy enough. I wish that Pixar (tm,...) would give him rights to display the demo *himself*, and only at user groups, and make sure that he wasn't using it for advertising purposes (which I don't think he would do anyway), so many more of us could see it (hey, he could go on tour ;-). But the Pixar (tm,...) people have done what they saw fit, and they are now subject to whatever the Amigans see fit to b*tch about. If they do not want to hear criticisms, they don't have to read this newsgroup. Any and all of the above are my own views, not anybody elses (including my employers), except maybe my cockatiels (they control my thoughts...!). Any of the above may be reproduced only for purposes of enjoyment, amusement, debate, or bird-cage bottom-filler. None of it may be reproduced for purposes of profit. -Chris -- Chris Lishka /lishka@uwslh.uucp Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene <-lishka%uwslh.uucp@rsch.wisc.edu \{seismo, harvard,topaz,...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka
ross@ulowell.UUCP (08/23/87)
Hmmm, Well, another thing that people seem to forget is that Pixar is not a big faceless corperation. They come from Lucas Film. Remember Star Wars, not your average faceless, lets churn another film out, big studio film. The reason that Pixar exists is that Lucas Film felt that using Crays for movie animation was not the way to go. Mostly for cost reasons. The above facts were from a presentation by Lucas Film a year or two ago at the Boston Computer Museum. Mabey it was two years. Andre and Wally Bee was shown also. It was hazy at the time what was Lucas Film and what was Pixar. A great comment the speaker made was that they had coded in assembly to avoid using FORTRAN. All of their graphics work was done in C otherwise. Whether this attitude was carried over to Pixar I know not, but because of the hazy lines of where and what Pixar was I would "assume" that some of it was. I have an intense dislike of F77, and that dislike is based on an informed opinion. Any group that avoids F77 is a good group in my book. Ross -- csnet: ross@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu uucp: ross@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu || ...wanginst!ulowell!ross Trust the computer. The computer is your friend.