View Single Post
Old 12-30-2012, 03:27 PM
schferk schferk is online now
Registered User
Join Date: 11-02-2010
Posts: 151
Interesting discussion here throughout page 37, between "J-Mac" and "Dormouse":

They openly discuss problems UR might have with MS integration, and "Dormouse" advocates that the work for MS integration gets harder, and less rewarding.

People there openly state that UR did indeed announce in 2008 or so that development will be stalled, and that we've seen exactly this, with the exception of the - also announced - necessary work for making UR work with Win 8 and such.

There's a blatant charge from "Dormouse": "has since just provided a path for people who upgrade their OS. I applaud that; takes away the feeling that it is an urgent matter to find an alternative." - in plain English, this means, that even minor adjustments ain't done because kinook loved his clientele, but just to assure that no more people than absolutely necessary will be leaving, by doing the least possible work here. I hope "Dormouse" is mistaken here, but often, openly cynical assertions are sheer truth.

He also well summarizes my idea on the market (without giving me credit, of course, but he concedes reading this forum attentively):

"I would really prefer that the program were popular and still actively developed, but I don't think that programs like these are the way that the market is moving. Developers everywhere are aping Apple or apping iOS, because that is where they think the money is. Programs are dumber but prettier and it is simpler to see what to do. The antithesis of UR really."

That's exactly what I did say here, in many more words, some weeks ago, except for him not going so far as to follow me in my conclusion:

You'll remember I said that's the reason why UR, in order to survive - and get a much more interesting market as well -, has to resolutely adopt the way I've advocated and detailed here, since, this becoming more and more common sense for everybody, in the "consumer market", there is no place left for applications like UR, exactly for the reasons detailed by me and summed up by "Dormouse" in his "The antithesis of UR really."

Of course, there is also and ever that problem of developers too much inclined in wanting to "be decently paid", instead of doing some work in order to produce excellence, all the more so considering that such outlays would pay if done in a strategic way (cf. those details).

A last word - and why I put this post into this thread here: It's evident that people who are very quiet here, do harm to this program where lots of multipliers are present. And can you blame them? Here, they don't think they will get any valid answer for constructive criticism. So they turn elsewhere and have at least the satisfaction of their criticism, now deconstructive, being heard - by third parties who'll decide over budgets and which programs will make it into their networks.

And no, allowing for such developments is not smart.
Reply With Quote