kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu (Eric Kofoid) (02/20/91)
I think that the following message, which I recently posted to Info-Mac Digest V9 #42, is of interest to the readers of this group: >Sak Wathanasin writes: >> >>Date: Tue, 12 Feb 91 09:49:05 GMT >>From: Sak Wathanasin <sw@network-analysis-ltd.co.uk> >>Subject: [*] IM DA 2.0 demo >> >>In response to several requests following my msg on Info-Mac, I am >>attaching the demo version of the Inside Mac DA v 2.0. I am not >>sending the full version both because of its size, and out of >>deference to the wishes of the author, Bernard Gallet. >> >>I suggest that the version that is now in the archives *not* be >>deleted since the demo version has a much reduced manual. I do not >>know if the demo version will work with the v 1.x manual. >> >>M. Gallet's addr for those of you who missed it is: > >>660 Miller Ave >>Cupertino >>CA 95014 >> >>Best regards >>Sak >> > >On 29 September 1990, I sent Bernard Gallet $20 as shareware fee for >version 2 of InsideMac DA. On 16 November, after receiving no reply, I >sent a second letter calling this to his attention. To date, I have heard >and received nothing. Copies of this (one-sided) correspondence are >available on request. On UseNet, others have registered similar >complaints. It seems that if you send him money, it enters a black hole. > >IM DA is a wonderful program. However, I cannot morally advise people to >use shareware without paying the fee. Therefore, I suggest avoiding this >product until the author learns some simple business ethics. > >Cheers, > >Eric. __________________________________________________________________ | Eric Kofoid; Dept. Biology, U. of Utah; SLC, UT 84112 | | (801) 581-3592 | | kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu | | | | -- The University of Utah is blameless for anything I've said -- | |__________________________________________________________________|
ollef@sics.se (Olle Furberg) (02/20/91)
In <1991Feb19.183333.8629@fcom.cc.utah.edu> kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu (Eric Kofoid) writes: >>To date, I have heard >>and received nothing. Copies of this (one-sided) correspondence are >>available on request. On UseNet, others have registered similar >>complaints. It seems that if you send him money, it enters a black hole. Does this mean there is no way to get the full version of IM DA 2.0 ? Has anybody seen it? I'm prepared to pay my SW fee, but I won't do it if I don't get the full version!
sw@nan.co.uk (Sak Wathanasin) (02/21/91)
In article <1991Feb19.183333.8629@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu (Eric Kofoid) writes: > >On 29 September 1990, I sent Bernard Gallet $20 as shareware fee for > >version 2 of InsideMac DA. On 16 November, after receiving no reply, I > >sent a second letter calling this to his attention. To date, I have heard > >and received nothing. Copies of this (one-sided) correspondence are > >available on request. On UseNet, others have registered similar > >complaints. It seems that if you send him money, it enters a black hole. Well, I can only speak from my experience, which is that I sent in my $25, and got a disk with IM 2.0 as a result. It did take a while though. Perhaps someone living nearer can find out. --- Sak Wathanasin Network Analysis Limited uucp: ...!ukc!nan!sw other: sw@network-analysis-ltd.co.uk phone: (+44) 203 419996 snail: 178 Wainbody Ave South, Coventry CV3 6BX, UK
siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (siegman) (02/22/91)
Inside Mac (IM) is actually a neat DA, and if one invests a little trouble in figuring out the garbled description of the file formats one can use it to access one's own data base and create an "Inside Pascal" or "Inside TeX" or whawtever DA, with useful information for other subjects stored in it and immediately accessible. I too wish Bernard Gallet would surface and make his whereabouts known, however. (I also sent him money, quite some time ago, and got something back at that time.)
lim@iris.ucdavis.edu (Lloyd Lim) (02/22/91)
In article <141@sierra.STANFORD.EDU> siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU (siegman) writes: >Inside Mac (IM) is actually a neat DA, and if one invests a little >trouble in figuring out the garbled description of the file formats >one can use it to access one's own data base and create an "Inside >Pascal" or "Inside TeX" or whawtever DA, with useful information for >other subjects stored in it and immediately accessible. I modified IM DA 1.2 extensively so that it was a complete reference for volumes I-IV. (IM DA uses the text of prerelease version of IM which makes it a little inconsistent and different from the published versions. Volumes I-III looked almost exactly like the phone book - remember that?!) Unfortunately, the format of 2.0 is not well documented and seems sort of inflexible. The conversion from 1.2 to 2.0 is also rather buggy. Consequently, I use both 1.2 and 2.0 on my system - 1.2 for vols. I-IV because it's much more organized (IMHO) and 2.0 for anything else. >I too wish Bernard Gallet would surface and make his whereabouts >known, however. (I also sent him money, quite some time ago, and got >something back at that time.) I sent him a long letter regarding various bugs after I got 2.0 and I haven't heard from him either. IM DA is great but I think he's lucky to still have it considering that all of IM is copyrighted material and IM DA directly copies it. +++ Lloyd Lim Internet: lim@iris.eecs.ucdavis.edu Compuserve: 72647,660 US Mail: 215 Lysle Leach Hall, U.C. Davis, Davis, CA 95616
2fmlcalls@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (02/22/91)
In article <0101000D.6so0z4@nan.co.uk>, sw@nan.co.uk (Sak Wathanasin) writes: > >On 29 September 1990, I sent Bernard Gallet $20 as shareware fee for >> >version 2 of InsideMac DA. On 16 November, after receiving no reply, I >> >sent a second letter calling this to his attention. To date, I have heard >> >and received nothing. Copies of this (one-sided) correspondence are >> >available on request. On UseNet, others have registered similar >> >complaints. It seems that if you send him money, it enters a black hole. > > Well, I can only speak from my experience, which is that I sent in my $25, > and got a disk with IM 2.0 as a result. It did take a while though. Perhaps > someone living nearer can find out. > > --- > Sak Wathanasin > Network Analysis Limited I certainly would never condone a shareware author who takes in checks without following up on a promise, but I think some people who send in shareware payments do so with the wrong attitude. A shareware author releases their software without any gaurantees that those who use her/his software will reward the author for their effort. There is as well that classic rift between the software authors and the entepreneurs - the dichotomy suggests that good programmers make poor business-people and vise versa. I write shareware - I don't have a secretary - letters can easily get lost in the mess of paper, printouts, source code and bills I have lying around. I understand that the odds of losing three correspondances from the same person is slim, but it's difficult for me to get angry at the shareware author in question. He's surely not out to cheat anyone - we have virus authors for that. More than likely he's being cheated daily by the hundreds (thousands?) of people who use his program without even sending him a 'Thanks'. And when I send in a shareware fee for a program I use, I tend to send the check off with about the same attitude I do when I send out a program - I expect the worst. john calhoun
francis@uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (02/22/91)
In article <8416@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> lim@iris.ucdavis.edu (Lloyd Lim) writes: IM DA is great but I think he's lucky to still have it considering that all of IM is copyrighted material and IM DA directly copies it. Oh, come on! Apple sue somebody for copyright violation? Unthinkable! :-) -- /=============================================================================\ | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Until you stalk and overrun, | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | you can't devour anyone. -- Hobbes | \=============================================================================/
wayner@bestla.cs.cornell.edu (Peter Wayner) (02/23/91)
2fmlcalls@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: >In article <0101000D.6so0z4@nan.co.uk>, sw@nan.co.uk (Sak Wathanasin) writes: >> >On 29 September 1990, I sent Bernard Gallet $20 as shareware fee for >>> >version 2 of InsideMac DA. On 16 November, after receiving no reply, I >>> >sent a second letter calling this to his attention. To date, I have heard >>> >and received nothing. Copies of this (one-sided) correspondence are >>> >available on request. On UseNet, others have registered similar >>> >complaints. It seems that if you send him money, it enters a black hole. >> >> Well, I can only speak from my experience, which is that I sent in my $25, >> and got a disk with IM 2.0 as a result. It did take a while though. Perhaps >> someone living nearer can find out. >> >> --- >> Sak Wathanasin >> Network Analysis Limited I too had no problem. Love that product too. It's my favorite. -Peter Peter Wayner Department of Computer Science Cornell Univ. Ithaca, NY 14850 EMail:wayner@cs.cornell.edu Office: 607-255-9202 or 255-1008 Home: 116 Oak Ave, Ithaca, NY 14850 Phone: 607-277-6678
kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu (Dr. Cancer) (02/23/91)
In article <28731.27c43a2a@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> 2fmlcalls@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: > I certainly would never condone a shareware author who takes in checks > without following up on a promise, but I think some people who send in > shareware payments do so with the wrong attitude.... > > [violins] > >...I tend to send the check off with about the same attitude I do when I > send out a program - I expect the worst. > > john calhoun Nothing personal, but give me a break! If one distributes software indicated as "shareware" in *any* kind of advertisement, then one has entered into a contractual agreement with the people reading it. If they do what the author tells them to do, then the author *has* to send the product. This is the law. To do otherwise is false advertising. IM DA 2.0 is not present in any archive. The only way to get it is from Bernard Gallet. Several kind readers have sent me similar horror stories, most saying that they received the product ultimately by copying from a friend or (in one instance) by contacting the author directly by phone. I refuse to become a pirate and illegally copy the DA. What I want is quite simple: For Gallet to honor his advertising and send me the product I paid for. In the meantime, I simply wish to alert people to the manner in which he conducts business. Gallet may be a perfectly decent guy, but absent minded, as you say. If so, then the least he can do is drop me a letter or some email explaining the delay, or return my money. If I hear something convincing from him, then I will post it to the net. Otherwise, I'm going to stay annoyed and let the world know about it. Cheers, Eric.
watt@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Gill Watt) (02/25/91)
kofoid@bioscience.utah.edu (Dr. Cancer) writes: >IM DA 2.0 is not present in any archive. The only way to get it is from >Bernard Gallet. Like many others, I too have sent Mr. Gallet the requested amount of money several months ago and have heard nor received nothing since. The check I sent has not cleared yet, and probably won't so I have not lost any money and am not angry. I am, however, disappointed that I cannot use IM DA simply because Mr. Gallet doesn't have an efficient and effective business organization. It seems to be a good product for which I have a real need. This, being my first experience with shareware, has caused me to doubt the ability of the shareware distribution system to "deliver the goods." Perhaps Mr. Gallet could sell his program to a small company that could handle the distribution for him. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Gill Watt (watt@eleazar.dartmouth.edu) Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
niko@iastate.edu (Schuessler Nikolaus E) (02/26/91)
> >I sent him a long letter regarding various bugs after I got 2.0 and I haven't >heard from him either. IM DA is great but I think he's lucky to still have it >considering that all of IM is copyrighted material and IM DA directly copies >it. > Maybe that's why he's not responding ..... :-( --
2fmlcalls@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (02/27/91)
In article <1991Feb26.102614.6071@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, cheshire@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Stuart David Cheshire) writes: > I too have written twice to Bernard Gallet about getting IM DA 2.0, and I have > heard nothing either. > > Stuart Cheshire (cheshire@cs.stanford.edu) Someone the other day sent me a letter (snail) verifying that in fact I'm at the same address before sending me a check for source code. With this IM DA 2.0 problem, it occurred to me that this person had a pretty good idea. I would suggest that anyone expecting to send shareware money to an author in hopes of receiving something in return - try sending a letter first explaining that a shareware 'order' will follow if the author responds. Unless you need 'it' in a hurry, this should save some anger. Now, if the author responds, "Sure, send the check..." and THEN doesn't follow through, roast 'em. john calhoun