Greetings,
I wanted to answer what you said. My frustration derives not from the
learning curve--which is to be expected--but from the possibility that the
order or the sequencing of which version should follow which version is
unclear. Fortunately the C D which Henter-JOyce is "giving" us gratis is
coming soon and shouldsolve my problems soon. And i do appreciatethat they
are putting 331.35 on C D which will make everything easier and convenient.
I went from 3.2 to the 3.3.022 C D to the Oct 15 downloa, because Tech
Support told meto do that. If people are downloading the versions in the
improper order, and people have asked for the correct order: then perhaps
there are several answers to the proper sequence of versions to be
downloaded.
I do not expeect people to know everything in one week of any release of any
product, however. Yet I do feel there are Access 32 issues which i learned
about from Tech Support that needto be resolved. I do like version 3.3.1.
It has been rushed a bit to be sure. And things could be made a whole lot
easier if there was access to clearer information even now. That is where
this list comes in. Hopefully the asking ofquestions like some mentioned
above will lead to answers--hopefully sooner than later. Also a friend
wrote me that there have been times when the Bug Report could not be found.
Really?
I am appreciative for all the information on this list. Yet clearer answers
regarding certain issues would help us and help prevent fewer mistakes from
occurring. Thanks
d
----- Original Message -----
From: Flor Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 9:15 PM
Subject: Re: An Editorial on Quality
> You probably hit a few nails on the head there, jim, and I also fsurmise
> that HJ fear that they have lost ground to WindowEyes in the last year or
so
> with respect to Web access, thus the fast-driven beta & release process we
> have been witnessing. I'm one of the fortunate, but there are users who
> haven't followed the betas and RC's in sequence who have downloaded 3.3135
> and appear to be having other problems not related particularly to
JFW3.3135
> because they didn't sequentially fill in.
> The policy of being charged for extra upgrades to non or expired -SMA
> holders, say from 3.0 to 3.3 in one move, should also be
uestioned. -----
> Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 1999 10:48 PM
> Subject: An Editorial on Quality
>
>
> : The HJ standard definition:
> : You know you are ready for beta, when the code compiles and links.
> :
> : Ok, tongue in cheek. But, Seriously. Ron Milliman's remarks reflect a
> : lot of my own sentiments. The quality of JFW is not improving quickly
> : enough to help us even keep pace with this rapidly moving industry. I
> : empathize with HJ technical staff in that I know they have a formidable
> : challenge. I am a software developer as well. In my business, we
employ
> : automated testing programs to do what we call regression testing, that
> : is, to make sure that everything that used to work, still does. They
are
> : clearly not doing that. And, I think they need to do so. I usually get
> : a JFW "release" and think, Jesus, this thing is not even ready for
alpha.
> : Alpha testing comes before beta testing. Beta means you think it is
> : correct, and just want to have some users do some last minute
> : verification to make sure. But, We commonly see bugs in "final
releases"
> : that should never have made it through testing.
> :
> : We know there is a quality problem in the PC industry generally. I am
> : sure I don't have to convince you of that. But, JFW, being a
fundamental
> : part of every single thing you and I do on the computer, is more
> : important than any individual application. It is the basic building
> : block upon which all the rest of our computer experience is based, and
> : upon which it depends. It is essential that it work as correctly as
> : possible. If an application misbehaves, a sighted person can usually
> : look at the screen and figure out what happened and deal with it. If
JFW
> : misbehaves, we often can't even tell what is going on. In other words,
> : the quality standards required of a screen reader exceed those of
> : applications in general.
> :
> : It is a damn good thing for HJ that the rest of the screen readers don't
> : have script languages behind them. I'm afraid HJ has got me there.
Once
> : you master that script language, you can do so many fantastic, powerful
> : things to make your application work like a breeze. You could never do
> : that with the other screen readers. So, I'm afraid I'm stuck with HJ
for
> : the long haul. It is, in fact, a fine screen reader, an excellent
> : architecture. And, thinking of that fine architecture complete with
> : excellent, dependable behavioral quality makes me salivate. (boy, am I
a
> : cheap date or what?)
> :
> : Come on, HJ. Let's solve the quality thing and kick the competition
> : clean off the board.
> :
> : Editorial by:
> : Jim Snowbarger
> : -
> : Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
> :
> :
>
> -
> Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
>
-
Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
