Jesse,

Pardon me for asking but... how does MM handle a situation where something
worked correctly on CF 5, but now is failing on CFMX?  Is that CFMX?  Or do
I pay to have MM tell me I need to re-write code?   This "connection reset
by peer" JDBC socket error that's been troubling us (notice I did not say
"bugging" :) could well be the result of some server setting or SQL config
option we have overlooked that  ODBC/CF 5 ignores, but JDBC looks for.  If
that turns out to be the case, would MM charge for that?

-mk



-----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 10:05 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF!


> Jesse, what Lee is trying to say is that MM should help him with the
> problem, without him having to pay extra for tech support.

He is *not* paying if the problem is with CFMX!

Not. Paying.

>
> I had a problem getting CFMX to run on my development system - the
> services wouldn't start when my system booted, MM wanted to charge me
> for tech support, and it wasn't until I posted to this list finding
> others with the same problem. They helped me and fixed the problem.


> I know Lee personally and he is one of the biggest CF supporters. Lee
> has helped me patiently through many CF problems, and to hear he's
> having these problems with MM is very discouraging.

. But you're *not* paying if the bug is with CFMX and not your code!


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 7:05 AM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF!
>
>
> Lee-
>
>       While I can understand your predicament, and I will pass this
> issue around to other I know of, I fail to see the rationale here.
>
>       Software, by it's very nature (programmed by humans, who are
> fallible) tends to have some bugs and problems.
>
>       There is a large group of people who run CFMX without issues and
> the only people who scream on the mailing lists and the forums are those
> with issues, therefore, if you took a daily snapshot of it all, you
> could very well think that the software, CFMX, is crap.
>
>       However, look at the support forums for WindowsXP, Apache, IIS,
> any of them. You'll see the same thing.
>
>       The fact is, no software is fool-proof. I was in CFQA and
> Development helping to work on CFMX, I know we ran this puppy through
> every little test you could think of.
>
>       Does this mean the software is bulletproof? No.
>
>       So, now you have some software you buy, and you have a problem.
> Do you send operating systems back when you run into an issue? Do you
> take a car back and ask for a refund if you find out a window is acting
> funny?
>
>       No, you go and get the issue resolved. My issue is that we
> cannot work on issues we cannot recreate in house. Let me give you a
> typical thread:
>
> User: CFMX suckxx!
> Someone else: What are you seeing?
> User: Stuff!
> Someone else: OoooKay... What sort of stuff
> User: Stuff that makes the server crash!
>
>       While Matt just sent a message decrying public communication
> between those of us at Macromedia and the community, how can we possibly
> work on bugs and issues that are reduced to "stuff is broken".
>
>       I can't recreate "stuff is broken". I can recreate "If I run
> Code X the server crashes under this OS, version and patch level".
>
>       Our primary method of recreating and debugging issues is an
> escalation through technical support. That's why they are there.
>
>       Technical support is the first line, they get the ducks in a row
> to allow development and QA to create a fully functional test case in
> house so that we can actually FIND the problem.
>
>       Going through support also assures that the problem will be
> fixed within a reasonable amount of time.
>
>       Are we working on fixing bugs? Yes. Could we have missed you
> bug? Yes. Are we working on recreating some of the problem pointed out
> on the mailing lists and forums? Yes.
>
>       How are supposed to communicate that? How can we publically say
> "We are working on a bug from the forums that 50 users are seeing" it's
> a matter of "firestorms" if 1 user sees it, it's a fact of life that
> unless it is properly escalated (through support), it may not be looked
> at for some time, however, if 50 users say "yeah, we see X under Y
> conditions" it will more than likely be fixed more quickly.
>
>       Sorry for the pseudo rant, but there seems to be a misconception
> on the reason why technical support is actually there, they are the
> pipeline to development, and to actually getting bugs fixed. Not the
> forums, not the Mailing lists.
>
>       While many of us internally may read these mediums, and watch
> for "trends" the "smaller" issues slip through the cracks. This is a
> problem of not only manpower (as it would take an army to sort through
> the data). But also resources. That's why support it there.
>
>       I highly recommend, if you are seeing an issue, to contact
> technical support, period. They are the best bet of you seeing your
> issue included in the next updater, or getting a custom patch.
>
>
> Jesse Noller
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Macromedia Server Development
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:48 AM
> > To: CF-Talk
> > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF!
> >
> > Yes.  But that's really not the point.
> >
> > I know you're just a "messenger" Jesse.. So I'm not trying to slay
> > you. But understand that many of us who support CF had to go to our
> > superiors and convince them to spend quite a bit of cash to support CF
>
> > in the firt place.  Then, after convincing them that it's a good
> > thing, they're now seeing their investment turn into more expense for
> > man-hours, customers jumping ship because of the lack of stability,
> > customers simply blowing off CF because it's become (and I'm quoting
> > at least three clients here) "...too bloated to hassle with any
> > more.", etc, etc.
> >
> > Now I'm being asked to go back these same people, who are now
> > SERIOUSLY questioning why they allowed us to talk them into spending
> > money on this beast, and ask them to allow me to use the company
> > credit card to (even
> > potentially) pay for a problem that would simply go away with a quick
> > flick of a mouse button over an "uninstall" file?
> >
> > I'm being told that they are thinking about simply sending back the
> > software and asking for a refund.  Now, color me silly but that
> > doesn't sound like people who will support my asking for a credit card
>
> > to secure ANYTHING but maybe the freight to ship the discs, manual and
>
> > box back to Macromedia.
> >
> > Again.. Don't get me wrong.  I'm a HUGE fan of the CF technology..
> > TRULY!  We've been CF supporters since 1.0.  That's why this all seems
>
> > so sad and frustrating.  We've watched CF go from "no brainer --
> > fantastic technology!" to "OH MY GOD.. IT'S DOWN **AGAIN**??
> > WHY????!!! And they want MORE MONEY TO FIX IT???!!!"
> >
> > So you can see, it's a bit of a bad position I'm in.
> >
> >
> >
> > | -----Original Message-----
> > | From: Jesse Noller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > | Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 6:38 AM
> > | To: CF-Talk
> > | Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF!
> > |
> > |
> > | They asked for a credit card number to secure an amount unless it is
>
> > | a bug in CFMX, correct?
> > |
> > | Jesse Noller
> > | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > | Macromedia Server Development
> > |
> > | > -----Original Message-----
> > | > From: Lee Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > | > Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 9:36 AM
> > | > To: CF-Talk
> > | > Subject: RE: LONG time CF Supporter - About ready to dump CF!
> > | >
> > | > Yup... And (per my post) they've asked for support $ to
> > | figure it out.
> > | >
> > | > | I'm assuming you've made your problems known to Macromedia?
> > | >
> > | >
> > |
> >
>
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/cf_talk
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com

Reply via email to