> The key work here is "intended"
> ...Good Intentions pave the road
> to...well, you get the message.
I get it, but what more do you want? For example, there has never been a stable feature set for WindowBlinds - users have always pushed for more features. Sometimes I get annoyed that bugs are not fixed, but I understand why. I would be much less pleased (and Stardock would be selling far fewer copies) if, for example, WindowBlinds was perfectly stable, but didn't skin any of the XP taskbar and start panel.
As to the specific problems, 1. is the only one I can make a suggestion on - menu items remain hilighted because the popup menus that are expanded when they are hilighted are still open (eg. I move over Accessories, it opens, then I move to Games and it will be hilighted too until it opens and Accessories is closed) - this isn't a bug, although it might not be the way you feel it should work (the standard Windows start menu doesn't work like this).
> Cop-Out(Commercialism)
Not sure what you mean there. Either Stardock lets ODNT subscribers get the alpha/beta versions or it does not. Some people want them. You don't have to get them. You can get the "released" updates that come out every month or so.
> Diversity of the systems expected
> to work on?....I suppose you are an
> advocate of the infamous(although
> lame)Linux OS(if that's what you
> want to call it)?
No. I mean Stardock products are run on every Microsoft OS, from 95 to XP (incidentally, of these, 98 and ME cause the most problems). As much as MS has done to make them look and act the same, there are significant differences between each of them. Worse, there are differences that *seem* insignificant but actually turn out to be the root cause of bugs. Then add in all the programs that can interfere - mostly because they do things incorrectly but it hasn't ever mattered before - and you have a highly volatile situation.
It doesn't help that one of the programs that Stardock programs use heavily are the display device drivers, which tend to be notoriously flaky in 2D (because fast games are what sell them, not fast window dragging). Most software doesn't have to work with any other software, apart from the OS. WindowBlinds and WindowFX have to work with *all* of it, and ObjectBar and DesktopX have to work with lots.
> This paragraph seems like
> a "shot"(Archie Bunker Style) at
> me....
Partly, yes (hey, if you're going to be harsh . . . ), but it's true as well. If you felt that the products were not to the standard you required (and all of the things you mentioned could have been seen in the evaluation version) you shouldn't have bought it! Saying "I'm not buying this because" has a motivating effect on companies.
> I believe the price of Stardock's
> products are in the ballpark of
> current day software of it's type
> so, being a small company is of no
> consequence.
Software has high fixed cost and low variable (per-unit) cost. This is one reason why it's easy for companies to expand fast - if they have a killer product, they can sell lots of copies of it quickly. It also means that small companies have to either price their products higher or focus on critical areas first.
On the stability issue, I'd have to ask: are you running 98 or ME? If so, maybe you should consider upgrading to an OS that actually provides a stable base for applications. Those legacy OSs also have severe limitations in the areas which ODNT uses most - the GDI and User resource blocks. If they run out, you're going to have problems.
WinCustomize Forums
of any software and they should only be released to beta testers...not paying customers.
