kim@amdahl.UUCP (04/30/87)
[ Some days you eat the line ... some days the line eat's you ... ] Seems that Electronic Arts is also being sleazy with a "quiet" update to DMCS, in addition to the one reported here on DPaintII. Bob Mitchell writes (in our internal Amiga conference): > Deluxe Music Construction Set > > If (against my advice) you purchased Deluxe Music > Construction Set, EA is sending out a free replacement. > > You must have called them to complain, and given them > your name and address. > > They are not publicizing this. > > Assuming they fixed the bugs, it is an impressive product. > > Robert Mitchell BTW, I sent EA $20 way back in January for an unprotected version. To date, I have not heard *anything* whatsoever from them, but they finally did cash my check (within the past month). Hopefully, they will be sending me the newer version RSN. Wonder if the "E" in Electronic Arts will be offset as is reported for DPaintII? Anybody besides me feel these "quiet upgrades" are a sleazy way of doing business? /kim -- UUCP: kim@amdahl.amdahl.com or: {sun,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,ihnp4,seismo,oliveb,cbosgd}!amdahl!kim DDD: 408-746-8462 USPS: Amdahl Corp. M/S 249, 1250 E. Arques Av, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 CIS: 76535,25 [ Any thoughts or opinions which may or may not have been expressed ] [ herein are my own. They are not necessarily those of my employer. ]
hull@hao.UCAR.EDU (Howard Hull) (04/30/87)
In article <6411@amdahl.UUCP>, kim@amdahl.UUCP (Kim DeVaughn) writes: > > Seems that Electronic Arts is also being sleazy with a "quiet" > update to DMCS, in addition to the one reported here on DPaintII. >... > Wonder if the "E" in Electronic Arts will be offset as is reported for > DPaintII? Anybody besides me feel these "quiet upgrades" are a sleazy > way of doing business? > I do not believe that this method of upgrading is, in itself, sleazy. The improvement of a software product is a somewhat iterative process. As soon as a change is made, it needs to be tested in the application environment. Most software houses do what they can to make a respectable test set, but all are well aware that nothing models the perversity of the users quite so well as the users themselves. It is thus useful to sample intermediate products to the most active users before committing to the distribution of an unmitigated disaster. Usually such releases are identified as such, but it is thought by some to be more prudent to avoid a declarative stance, and to just try to field a product which seems to survive the test of increased distribution over time. It therefore may not be a good idea to pound on the software house for an upgrade, only then to discover that you have become a beta test site without really desiring to be one. So just ask yourself whether DP or DCMS is doing for you what you expect. If it isn't, then call them and tell them how their representation of the product misled you. Urge them to make the product live up to your expectations. As a "for instance", caste your jaundiced eyes upon the following: When I bought the full bore Manx Aztec compiler I was assured that the price included a reasonable level of software maintenance. As you all know, version 3.40a has been in the hands of the most active programmers for some time now. That's ok with me; as long as I don't notice any problems with my stuff, I'm better off not getting involved with the beta testing of the product. But there comes a time, as happened the other day (when out of sheer curiousity) I attempted to compile the latest PD version of "make", when one gets into difficulty. Please observe the following mess - cc -Damiga -Daztec -o make.o make.c Aztec C68K 3.20a 02-25-86 (C) 1982,83,84,85,86 by Manx Software, Inc. #define TRUE (1) ^ h.h:18: WARNING 114: macro redefined: TRUE #define FALSE (0) ^ h.h:19: WARNING 114: macro redefined: FALSE dos_packet(task, ACTION_SET_DATE, NULL, plock, (ULONG) &poin ^ make.c:413: ERROR 34: undefined symbol: ACTION_SET_DATE for (qdp = (struct depend *) 0, lp = np->n_line; lp; lp = l ^ make.c:453: WARNING 124: invalid ptr/ptr assignment: qdp = (struct depend *) 0; ^ make.c:463: WARNING 124: invalid ptr/ptr assignment: 1 errors exit code 4 Now this is what I define as an "upgrade crisis". Do I or do I not read the defines as amiga and manx... Does the compiler seem comfortable with the situation? Nosiree... So, one way or another, what I have shown you above is, (regardless of how innocent Manx may be of any deliberate laxity) more in tune with a notion of "sleazy" business practice than is not having the latest greatest version of EA DMCS. So tell me now, what was it you were trying to do with DMCS that didn't go as you liked, that you found in the product description or advertisement, or that you called them about to get action, but for which they seem to have responded to everyone but you with a clandestine upgrade? As I said, I don't want to become a Manx beta test site. I hope that they will soon send me an upgrade, and what's more I hope it won't be the same upgrade the rest of you got four months ago that has the The Three Bugs in it. Their compliance with this sweet notion of mine is what will decide for me whether their business practices are sleazy or not... Howard Hull [If yet unproven concepts are outlawed in the range of discussion... ...Then only the deranged will discuss yet unproven concepts] {ucbvax!hplabs | decvax!noao | mcvax!seismo | ihnp4!seismo} !hao!hull for domain mailers: hull@hao.ucar.edu
hull@hao.UUCP (05/01/87)
My previous net note said: > As I said, I don't want to become a Manx beta test site. I hope that they > will soon send me an upgrade, and what's more I hope it won't be the same > upgrade the rest of you got four months ago that has the The Three Bugs in > it. Their compliance with this sweet notion of mine is what will decide > for me whether their business practices are sleazy or not... > Howard Hull I got home and found the Manx upgrade had arrived today in the mail. It must have been on the way even as I wrote the above, and was probably in a sort bin at the downtown PO at the time. I am happy to report that the package meets my expectations exactly, and I didn't have to beat on them to get it. The package contained a two-page addenda describing the evolution of the 3.40a revision & mods, so I have indeed benefited by merely being (somewhat) patient, as described above. It is a trifle tardy, but I was not too bothered by that. There are many good improvements, and I can hardly wait to try out the new math libraries! To some extent, I suppose this lends some credence to the notion that EA is in remiss (so far, anyway) in not announcing at least the intent to upgrade DMCS and DP2; however, as I pointed out previously, they may be in the early stages of a smooth progression to a generally available upgrade. Certainly they did make an upgrade available from DP1 to DP2, and the upgrade had only a few bugs - or, in other words, was of entirely acceptable quality for the price they asked. Well, I think I've said enough about this - thanks for your tolerance, everyone. [If yet unproven concepts are outlawed in the range of discussion... ...Then only the deranged will discuss yet unproven concepts] {ucbvax!hplabs | decvax!noao | mcvax!seismo | ihnp4!seismo} !hao!hull for domain mailers: hull@hao.ucar.edu
trudel@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Jonathan D.) (05/02/87)
Pardon the ignorance, but what was/is so wrong with the current version, aside from how slow it is in loading files? I haven't bought anything yet, and I always like to hear the good and bad reviews... Jon -- Sometimes a fish needs a bicycle...
hatcher@INGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Doug Merritt) (05/02/87)
In article <11630@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> trudel@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Jonathan D.) writes: >Pardon the ignorance, but what was/is so wrong with the current >version [of DMCS], aside from how slow it is in loading files? Here are my notes from the first day that I bought it: - severe noise sometimes when hitting keys on screen with mouse - this noise sometimes gets stuck loudly on semipermenantly - vertical scroll of bars with mouse is "elastic" -- i.e. it fights small changes in position, even though it redraws the bar, which is really confusing. - no volume control (or if there is one, it says something that I never found it!) Less critical issues: - documention shows Mac screens and uses Mac terminology (i.e. it was quickly hacked for the Amiga, and carelessness with the documentation adds insult to injury for me, and could easily mislead someone who didn't know the Amiga well) - I consider it a bug that there is no waveform/instrument editor, although this is arguable. But it was demo'd at the user group meeting *with* such an editor, so although I may simply have missed the comments about not releasing it, all I can say is "why not???" There are lots of other little things that annoy me about it, but I haven't bothered to take notes about them. Nor do I use this program much...you would have to be either very forgiving and very uncritical, or else very determined. Doubtless after enough use it wouldn't seem so bad, but I don't like the learning curve! I'd prefer to spend my efforts on something that was well done to start with! Doug Merritt ucbvax!ingres!hatcher
wen@husc2.UUCP (wen) (05/03/87)
Other DMCS bugs: Changing the key signature in the middle of a piece results in the display of a key signature in EVERY subsequent measure. Selecting an entire piece and choosing, for example, Bar Notes, crashes the program. Slurs look terrible, thought ties are o.k. etc. A. Wen wen@husc4.HARVARD.EDU wen@harvunxu.BIid
neil@danger.UUCP (neil) (05/05/87)
> Other DMCS bugs:
Entering dotted quarter notes doesn't work properly, and the dotted
note symbol can't be entered on the staff.
Neil McCulloch
alberta!ncc!danger!neilwtm@neoucom.UUCP (05/05/87)
OK, you guys peaked my curiousity. I've been muddling along with the presumably original Deluxe Music, and I'd like to know the details of just what the "quiet upgrade" entails. I sent in my 25 bucks about 6 weeks ago, and I still don't have my non copy-proofed DMCS backup, perhaps they're waiting for a final upgrade version before shipping out. Maybe, it was 20 bucks, but their lethargy in filling the order is annoying. Aside from all the annoying glitches with editing the score and the notes on the piano keyboard that stick on making very odd noises, the most irksome bug is the handling of dynamics. They need some better way to handle crescendos. It seems like the volume zooms up to fff regardless of the dymanic spec you have made following the crescendo-- very jarring indeed! Also annoying is the fact that the loudness dosen't take effect until one note after where it should. It's possible to account for that, but of course the printed score is dumb. Speaking of printing-- that's rather annouying too. So far I can't get a decent looking printout from the Okidata 292; what I get looks like it was printed on an MPS-801 (iiiccck!!) The 292 is capable of ~300 dpi, and some packages such as Pizzaz (admittedly for IBM pc) take full advantage of that resolution. DMCS pretends to be professional, so it ought to be able to print a decent looking score. I have to be nice to EA in one respect; the Midi output works pretty well. I've been using a Yamaha FB-01 8 chan. synthesizer, and DMCS takes full advantage of sending it Midi packets to control it as indicated by the keyboard play style indicated in the score. Good job. I don't have a Midi keyboard yet; the midi input scheme looks painful, but not unexpectedly so. I guess they figure you'll use Soundscape if you want a midi sequencer. --Bill Bill Mayhew Division of Basic Medical Science Northeastern Ohio Univ.'s College of Med. Rootstown, OH 44272 USA phone: 216-325-2511 (wtm@neoucom.UUCP ...!cbatt!neouom!wtm)
hbo@ucsbcsl.UUCP (05/05/87)
Doug Merritt lists a few bugs in DMCS, I'd like to add my list.
1: If you load too many instruments, 10 or so, the sounds menu crashes.
The rendering of the menu goes glitched, and the lower reaches drop off
the bottom of the screen, becoming inaccessable. The last item in the
sounds menu is the "remove instrument" option, so the only way to recover
from this bug is to reboot!
2: MIDI input is badly broken. After an indeterminate number of notes
(usually less than three) it is time to talk to the guru.
3: On my 512K machine, the measures menu takes a vacation when the MIDI
drivers are loaded along with a score and instruments. This is due to
lack of memory, since it doesn't happen on my friends 2.5 meg machine.
I have written to EA twice, and called four times. The last phone
conversation took place yesterday (4 May) and resulted in a promise of an
upgrade within 10 days. I am not holding my breath, since I have been
repeatedly lied to by them in this regard.
My overall impression of DMCS is that it is a bloated, top heavy and buggy
mess. It is obviously written entirely in C, since it doesn't fit into 512K
of RAM. No wonder the picture of the authors in the manual shows them wearing
dark glasses: they don't want to risk identification! (.5 :-))
--
Howard Owen, Programmer/Analyst PHYSNET: SBPHY::HBO
University of California, Santa Barbara BITNET: HBO@SBITP
Physics Computer Services ARPA: hbo%sbphy@LBL.ARPA
usenet: ucbvax!ucsbcsl!hbo