OT: A comment on upgrading and support Was: Frame's future

[Bill Briggs]

At 12:58 PM -0800 2/25/07, Diane Gaskill wrote:
>It seems that sometimes people upgrade just to have the latest and (hopefully) the greatest version of a sw product, car, music system, etc. This includes Frame, Vista, and whatever.  But if the new version of a product does not have a feature I need or has fixed a bug that has been giving me trouble, I do not see the point in upgrading.  Why spend the money and the time on installing something and take a chance on having more bugs or incompatibilities on your system?
>
>There's an old saying: "If it aint broke, don't fix it."

 You just made a great point. It's the very reason why most Mac FrameMaker users didn't update from v6 to v7 (which no doubt helped Adobe say "there's no Mac market for FrameMaker"). Nothing compelling. None of the long-standing annoying bugs fixed (can you say "footnotes"). I'd still use FrameMaker with the version 3 functions if the alternative was Word. Sorry, but it just worked. Adobe's cred with FrameMaker is low precisely because they have not addressed those long-standing issues. I didn't need a new colour model in FrameMaker. I didn't need XML (though many did). I needed FrameMaker to be cross platform (I work with people on Sun, Win, Mac). I needed FrameMaker to be working on my platform. I needed FrameMaker to have an AppleScript implementation that wasn't so buggy that it would cough up random errors where there were none. I needed Adobe to CARE about the installed user base. What I got was the finger.

 - web