Upgrade version and pricing [was] Re: Fix it before moving ahead

[Geoff Canyon]

On Mar 14, 2004, at 12:14 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:

> On 3/14/04 1:53 PM, Marian Petrides wrote:
>
>> Yes.  So long as customers are still using 9.1.1, there is an 
>> implicit obligation to fix bugs therein.  Once a product is 
>> purchased, the manufacturer has an implicit obligation to the 
>> purchaser to ensure that it functions as advertised.  Simply 
>> releasing a "new version" does not relieve one of the obligation to 
>> fix defects in the older version.
>
> So, by this logic, Apple should still be releasing bug fixes for OS 
> 8.6? Lots of people still use it.

Jacque, I don't think you're the one who introduced OS versions into 
this, so forgive me if I respond to your email as the most recent in 
this thread.

I think the comparison to OS versions is faulty. With OSes, there is 
the implicit tie to hardware, and the assumption that many people will 
wait to upgrade, or not upgrade at all. As you say, there is still a 
large number of people using OS 8.6, and others have referred to 
Windows 98 and 95.

A better comparison is to other applications. For how long after Office 
2003 or Office 2004 for Mac came out did Microsoft continue to release 
bug fixes for the previous versions? In my experience, the answer has 
been, "about ten seconds."

For a more accurate comparison to Revolution, for how long after, say, 
Snapz Pro 2.0 comes out (by the way, Snapz Pro 2.0 rocks the world) 
will Ambrosia support Snapz Pro 1.0?

And to those who debate what constitutes a bug fix vs. a feature, one 
of the main features of Snapz Pro 2.0 is that it is fast, fast, fast. 
1.0 was nearly unusable on my computer because it was so slow. 2.0 
works great. Is that a bug fix, or a feature? All I can tell you is 
that I happily paid to upgrade.

regards,

Geoff Canyon
gcanyon at inspiredlogic.com