On Sun, 1 Dec 1996, Mike Nolan wrote:
> > I thought I'd report back on some changes we're going to make to
> > Lyris as a result of the feedback from this list.
>
> Since this is a a commercial product and you are using this list as a test
> market without a beta agreement, where do we send our consulting fee
> invoices to?
This is no test market. This is an exchange of ideas about software
design. We are the beneficiaires of any smart changes which occur as a
result.
Actually, when I first posted a query here inviting comment on features
of Lyris vs. Listproc and Lsoft, there was modest response compared to
the knowledge everyone in fact has. I asked John Buckman whether he was
on this list, since he didn't respond to my queries here. He then joined
the list to partipate in the exchange of technical information of
comparative nature, as I requested, to improve on the level real detail
and dialogue.
He then posted a liberal amount of detail lacking prior thereto, and
proceeded to get flamed like hell. I think all list managers do
themselves a real disservice by acting like that.
Think about it. We all probably feel there is no perfect list management
software available, just some better and some worse. Perhaps we all wish
that more vendors would come up with more offerings which include more of
the stuff just the way we all want. Someone has to spend the time and
money to get there, and over a considerable period of time. Like
everyone, they check the market, gather feedback, and adjust over time.
John Buckman didn't come here to ask for product design advice. He came
here to provide the information that we were discussing in a thread, and
which I suggest he contribute to.
That is how it *should be* if we're going to see progress, especially
customer oriented progress.
We've just seen a very remarkable event here. A new vendor on the market,
working seriously on a new offering, has explanied their rationale,
gotten feedback, and plans to implement just what folks asked for here.
That is pretty darn nice in my book. I hope it applies to other important
features as well. How else are we going to move toward better options?
I think it is a disservice to express our ideas of what is good and bad
design with the almost hot headed, flame like remarks. If a vendor is
willing to listen and explain rationales, why not welcome it and
communicate in cooperative spirit. Why try to burn folks up?
What we all really need is very clear thinking, exchange of info for the
sake of solid, good change. Let's encourage that. Not throw mud in their
faces.
If you want to succeed in vendors into "oblivion", then you'll succed
most likely in finding products of inferior quality, less customer and
real world oriented, on the market. And some of them may screw up some of
your work life more than if you could have influenced design early on.
My suggestion would be to thank the Lyris folks for laying out the info,
for implementing at least one important change right away, and then see
what other important considerations should take place. What if it results
in some great new products over the next year?
James Cook
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
