med@druhi.ATT.COM (Myron Drapal) (09/04/88)
> From uucp Wed Aug 31 20:17 MDT 1988 > >From ames.arc.nasa.gov!uucp!atari!apratt Wed Aug 31 12:03:34 PDT 1988 remote from arpa > Received: Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:07:38 PDT by ames.arc.nasa.gov (5.59/1.2) > Received: by atari.UUCP (4.12/4.7) > id AA12987; Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:03:34 pdt > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:03:34 pdt > From: atari!apratt@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Allan Pratt) > Message-Id: <8808311903.AA12987@atari.UUCP> > To: ames!med@druhi.ATT.COM > Subject: BETA TOS > > In article <3451@druhi.ATT.COM> you write: > > Well, Allan, I really hate to rain on your parade again, but this stuff > > about the new format being compatible with the PC is just not true... > > At least not in the BETA ROMS... > > PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS. > PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS. > PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS. > PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS. > > Am I making myself clear? > > If you have a comment to make about Beta ROMs or any other unreleased > Atari product, use the appropriate communication channels: in this case, > send us an SPR. If you don't know how to do that (for example, because > you copied the ROMs without copying the instructions for reporting about > them) you can mail us a letter. We probably won't even prosecute > you or the official beta tester who let you copy the ROMs, because we > want the feedback. This is not a legal opinion, but it would be my > recommendation. ^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ Finally, a legal opinion worth the paper that it is printed on... > But you do not get any goodwill by flaming us in > public about UNRELEASED products. ^^^^^^^^ Good will starts at home, and I think that your company needs to start treating its registered developers (and customers) better if it expects to be on the receiving end of some good will. In my final commentary regarding this on NETNEWS, I suggest that the following issues need to be solved to help this along: 1. NETNEWS was the accepted forum for bug reporting, especially when Landon and Alex were employed at Atari. In fact, discussions usually included the report of the bug, followed by discussions from developers and the Atari folks regarding how the bug was noticed (reproducibility) and even possible solutions, both long term and short term. In particular, the 40 folder bug was solved this way. 2. Most registered developers have not been receiving updated documents or information regarding new bug report procedures. I have been a registered Atari ST devloper for over two years. I have yet to receive any update notices, new documentation (the GDOS documents that some registered developers got a few months back), nor was I notified that the new TOS 1.4 was being made availble to BETA sites. I know this isn't your fault (Allan and Roy), but you are the only people from Atari on the NET that seem to listen. Where is the support? I realize that $300 is not much if you consider the entire development cost of the ST. It is, however, a significant investment to those of us who don't have money to burn. I, for one, feel that the quality of the documentation in the developer package was at best mediocre, and we developers are entitled to updates in a reasonable amount of time. Promises were made to these few who forked over the $300 that updates would be made available, but I have not seen any to date. I am not alone in this feeling, either. A number of very good third party developers have left your fold, primarily due to very poor support on Atari's part. 3. Instructions for reporting bugs should be made available to all owners - not just a few "selected" registered developers. Even a person who owns an ST and only runs 1st Word should be able to report a problem to you. They may be using the system in a way that none of us could possibly dream of. If there had been such an approved method of reporting bugs and it had been distributed to all owners (simply through Compuserve, NETNEWS, etc.), this whole issue would not have happened at all. > > Please cut it out. If you really don't want the feedback, please create a new newsgroup (I suggest mod.sys.atari.st), designate yourself as moderator, and screen the postings as you see fit. But, if you really do want the feedback (as you claim above), please make the reporting mechanism and the instructions available to all ST owners. We're all in this together - I think most of us are willing to help, given the proper information and consideration. > > I post this in public because the offense was committed in public. I am > also sending mail, because that is far less likely to be overlooked by > the intended recipient. Ditto. I'm afraid that the only offense that I'm guilty of is telling the truth in a public forum. For that, I plead guilty. Myron Drapal AT&T Denver att!druhi!med
trb@stag.UUCP ( Todd Burkey ) (09/05/88)
In article <3517@druhi.ATT.COM> med@druhi.ATT.COM (Myron Drapal) writes: >...In my final commentary >regarding this on NETNEWS... Thank goodness. It was sure getting tiring reading all this drivel about what you consider to be proper beta testing methodology. If this hasn't scared Atari off of doing Beta testing in the future, then nothing will. I know for a fact that if I were in the final stages of a products' development, gave a preliminary version of the program to a few trusted friends to check out, and subsequently found out that someone else had obtained a copy and was not only badmouthing the preliminary version, but also my company, on a worldwide network, then rest assured I would be pissed as hell as well. /* FLAME ON...my first flame ever :-) */ Why don't you go buy one of those fire-sale 3B1's. That should keep you busy complaining for a year or two. The rest of us will just fumble our way along developing and learning. Guess we don't know any better. /* FLAME OFF */ -Todd Burkey trb@stag.UUCP
kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) (09/07/88)
in article <3517@druhi.ATT.COM>, med@druhi.ATT.COM (Myron Drapal) says: >> From: atari!apratt@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Allan Pratt) >> Subject: BETA TOS >> >> PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS. ( operative word here is )---------------^^^^^^^^^^ [ some stuff deleted ] >> But you do not get any goodwill by flaming us in >> public about UNRELEASED products. ^^^^^^^^ > > Good will starts at home, and I think that your company needs to start > treating its registered developers (and customers) better if it expects > to be on the receiving end of some good will. [ more stuff deleted ] > 1. NETNEWS was the accepted forum for bug reporting, especially when > Landon and Alex were employed at Atari. I have no problem with responding to bug reports of released products via netnews. In fact, this practice may come into play more, as the Developer Release of TOS 1.4 makes it into developers' hands. The fact is that we are establishing a formal method for reporting bugs and suggesting enhancements to Atari products. The front end of this method is a program that I wrote, SPRgen, which went to the subsidiaries with the beta release along with instructions on how to report bugs in the beta release. SPRgen is also included in the Developer Release, with instructions on how to report bugs/enhancements in that version. > 2. Most registered developers have not been receiving updated documents > or information regarding new bug report procedures. Most? I don't think most. Some certainly haven't recieved updates (three have mentioned it on the net). The developer mailing list needs to be updated. Roy has since suggested a way that people in net-land can ensure that they are on the mailing list. > 3. Instructions for reporting bugs should be made available to all > owners - not just a few "selected" registered developers. As Roy has mentioned, the plan is eventually to release SPRgen (a GEM application with a simple user interface and complete instructions on how to report problems) to all Atari users. SPRgen is still a little rough around the edges. We felt it would be best for registered developers to have at the program before we unleash it to all Atari owners. This will also allow us to streamline the operation of the PTS database internally, so things go smoothly when SPRgen is in the hands of John Q. Atari User. >> [Allan Pratt again:] >> Please cut it out. > > If you really don't want the feedback, please create a new newsgroup > (I suggest mod.sys.atari.st), designate yourself as moderator, and > screen the postings as you see fit. We really do want the feedback. What we don't want is unsolicited reports of already-fixed bugs in products that aren't released or supported. >> I post this in public because the offense was committed in public. I am >> also sending mail, because that is far less likely to be overlooked by >> the intended recipient. > > Ditto. > > I'm afraid that the only offense that I'm guilty of is telling the truth > in a public forum. For that, I plead guilty. I have kept my virtual mouth shut through the course of this discussion, but I felt that as the PTS coordinator and a TOS developer, I should tell "my version of" the truth. Until I was hired by Atari, I was on the recieving end of Atari developer support for quite some time. Hopefully my experience will have some influence on how I support developers via the Product Tracking system and other forums. I would like to thank Mr. Drapal for his concern, and I hope that he continues to contribute in the future by sending his System Problem Reports about the Developer and future releases of TOS. -- Ken Badertscher | Hey, umm, the stuff I said up there Atari R&D Software Test/Support | is, like, what _I_ think, okay? {portal,ames,imagen}!atari!kbad | So, y'know, don't bug Atari about it.