Attachment 122084
Printable View
Radical.
Acorn
Agreed ... It's the right thing to do.
It really is that simple.
An aha moment for magixara perhaps?
It could be so easy.
@pauland - we do have a mechanism for delivering critical bug fixes, even after expiry. We described it in our Update Service doc (see https://www.talkgraphics.com/showthr...ting-Explained) but I'm happy to improve that wording if you don't think it's clear.
If I re-download the version I purchased after my Update Service has expired, how will I get any bug fixes you release? If there are bug fixes we consider critical we release a point update. For example Designer Pro 12.6.0 was followed by 12.6.1 and 12.6.2 which had bug fixes but no new features. If you are entitled to 12.6.0 and download it, it will automatically update to 12.6.2, even if 12.6.2 was released after your Update Service expired.
I think the common perception has been that that was not the case - glad to hear that it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster
Note how much clearer and concise the Sketch FAQ is.
Also note that Sketch allows people to access cloud documents even after their subscription has expired - something that Xara should think about - retaining access to any online catalog content accessed during the subscription period in a document created when the subscription was live would be helpful.
The subscription model is deeply unpopular and a few tweaks would go some way to taking the sting out of the tail.
I use Sketch ( a design programme for Mac ), and decided I didn't need an immediate update when my subscription finished. Now I've judged that an update is worthwhile and so I have renewed my subscription. At all stages I felt that Bohemian Software had taken care not to make things difficult when I didn't renew my subscription and to make it very easy to renew it. I'd like to see Xara have that kind of relationship with the customer base once again.
Thanks for responding Kate.
that is the sting in the tail - what the company thinks is not-critical may be critical to users, especially if is was something broken by an previous update as appears to be the case with the PDF issue ernie-f posted up...Quote:
Originally Posted by webmaster
There is very little software that has no bugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
Every company that creates software will only fix some of their bugs in any given release, so if a subscription runs out and a bug is fixed in a later release then the path to accessing it is to renew the subscription or move to an alternative. It's just the real world.
Companies need money for bug fixes and that doesn't come from people who aren't subscribed.
I mentioned Sketch and the fact that I dropped out of the subscription. I'm sure my software had bugs, but nothing I was concerned about. If I was concerned and the bug became fixed it is entirely right that I should pay for a new subscription to fund the ongoing development.
I don't feel that Xara does anything different to any other company in this respect - it was long discussed that a user would lose bug fixes occurring since the last point release, but Kate has said that that is not the case.
I think some bugs have persisted in Xara software for years, haven't they?
Am I missing something?
yes Paul I appreciate all of that but at the risk of repeating myself... if something that works in version A is then broken by version B, and it is something as important as PDF export is, it should be fixed before version C...
If I understand correctly, you are referring to a specific current bug. I'm not sure what that has to do with a comment about how licences handle subscription lapses.
… so that whatever version one has at whatever point during the 365 days, if one does not update, then one should get any and all bug patches - for that version.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
It seems that new features bring new bugs, but sometimes bug patches mess up something else, requiring another patch with the potential to mess up something else, and so on. Given all of that, we never seem to get a fully patched version; some bugs are left for the next version, unfortunately. This seems to be all too prevalent in this industry, not just with Xara.
Sorry for my uncharacteristic pessimism.
Well what is a version is something that is subjective. If we talk full point releases, then OK, but often there are sub-point releases adding new features.Quote:
Originally Posted by browj2
Absolutely, and even a bug fix can introduce a new bug.Quote:
It seems that new features bring new bugs, but sometimes bug patches mess up something else, requiring another patch with the potential to mess up something else, and so on.
It is. But that's because we are human and because we only pay enough money to companies to support a finite amount of bug fixing and product development. Xara could fix lots more bugs but would the user base be happy with a much higher subscription charge?Quote:
Given all of that, we never seem to get a fully patched version; some bugs are left for the next version, unfortunately. This seems to be all too prevalent in this industry, not just with Xara.
I can feel the frustration. Every software developer ends up fixing bugs (and creating them).Quote:
Sorry for my uncharacteristic pessimism.
I have worked for large corporations developing software (much bigger than Xara, with a subscription cost that would buy a house) and on one occasion worked specifically in a patch team - building product patches in response to customer bug reports. That was many years ago. I can say that we squashed a lot of bugs and sometimes added new ones. We also had the complication of working across multiple operating systems.
That software (which still had bugs, like every other bit of software) has continued to be developed since then and I belong to a group where people report their problems (I don't work for the manufacturer anymore, nor do I still use the software) and often I think why are people still reporting these kinds of issues after all this time? Sometimes I wonder why the software still has such primitive ways of doing things all these years later.
So while I still get surprised by all this, I know the answer - the software is complex, it's been around for a very long time so the codebase is like a mysterious beast - lots of people have worked on it and everyone is very wary of what happens to it for fear of breaking it because of some unexpected side-effect of a change. The development and bug fixing teams have a finite size and a finite amount of effort available. I am pretty certain that code that I wrote over 20 years ago will still be in the product and I know that then there were sections of the code that only a few people would consider touching because of the high complexity and I'm also certain that the people who originally wrote that code and those that I knew that followed them are no longer in the company.
So you can be paying thousands (per month even) and still be using software with buggy code - because it's only mission-critical software that is tested to extremes to eradicate all the bugs humanely possible. That software is very expensive. Testing is very expensive and that mission critical software does not evolve at any great speed and is limited in features to reduce the complexity wherever possible.
My story is not about Xara, but it could be. The codebase is old, the development and bug fixing capacity limited.
The PDF bug is going to be a real issue for some people and of little consequence for many. I can understand how it might have been fixed but then reintroduced. Developers are human beings, working under pressure and we make mistakes.
Don't be surprised at how this works - it's a consequence of fallible people, like yourself writing software. It's not just about the failings of people it's about the failure of entire systems at times (we all know the rules of driving, we can do the right thing and follow them but a brake failure can still make us crash).
I'm sorry, but I think you're wasting your time wanting entirely bug-free software and railing at Xara about it.
Paul I was using the PDF as an example of a bug fix that users [not all I'll grant] think critical and xara apparently does not; this in the context of comparing xara's approach to bug fixes with that staed in the second part of the Sketch statement you posted, which implies no such restriction - all part of the update services being compared
btw - is sketch purely cloud based or does it have desktop as well? delivery mechanisms for bug-fixes/updates differ desktop/cloud
a cynic might say this is good for maximising compasny revenue - no matter which version you have there will always be something you need in the nextQuote:
Originally Posted by browj2
there again it could just be there is never enough time to get everything right - but hey that still means the second part of the above sentance pertains [if you are a cynic... ;)]
Paul
we cross posted
I don't have an issue with never having bug-free - my issue is with the company not seeming bothered about what is critical to a sector of it's user base..Quote:
I'm sorry, but I think you're wasting your time wanting entirely bug-free software and railing at Xara about it.
... and I understand all you say about the legacy coding - one reason serif/affinty started again; if they could do it, why not xara?
Then go at Xara about specific problems rather than the generalities of my thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
Well they kinda did, but didn't get as far as they hoped, with the online version.Quote:
serif/affinty started again; if they could do it, why not xara?
As for Serif, I hated their software until they went for the affinity products. I actually didn't trust them because of their marketing tactics. I guess they had a pot of money to go for the rewrite and a realisation that their existing products were falling behind. Brave decision that is paying off big time.
Xara used to have command of it's own destiny (let's forget the Corel diversion), but now Magix are in control. Rightly or wrongly I regard Magix as a company that picks up products that are profitable but have a questionable long-term future. Xara derivatives are just part of a wider portfolio of products to bring in revenue to Magix, so I am a pessimist about that relationship and where Xara can go forward. Xara as part of Corel seemed to hold back development way back when.
This is all rather off-topic now.
It's a desktop program but offers cloud based features for documents ( mostly to do with collaborations between people ). It's hugely popular in web design - feature-wise Xara does way more than sketch, but because it is oriented towards a specific goal - software/website design - it doesn't have 1,000 features you don't need and five that you do. It doesn't try and be a photoshop/illustrator/inDesign/Dreamweaver amalgam like Xara. It does one job really well. Anyone using Xara could tell me 50 things Xara does that Sketch doesn't. I would agree with them and say it's better to do some things really well and be fast and easy to work with than have 50 extra things there that get in the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by handrawn
I make a lot of design stuff in Sketch and use the assets created using Sketch in other software. I have an eco-system of software that forms my development pipeline.
off topic or not that is something I can agree withQuote:
Xara used to have command of it's own destiny (let's forget the Corel diversion), but now Magix are in control. Rightly or wrongly I regard Magix as a company that picks up products that are profitable but have a questionable long-term future. Xara derivatives are just part of a wider portfolio of products to bring in revenue to Magix, so I am a pessimist about that relationship and where Xara can go forward. Xara as part of Corel seemed to hold back development way back when.
This is all rather off-topic now.
that has been done in three threads, two now closed; mentioned here merely as an example like I said...Quote:
Then go at Xara about specific problems rather than the generalities of my thread.
first I get queried for specifics, and now for generalities; firgive me for trying to explain :)
but which ever way you look at it bug fixing is relevant to the licences and therefore this thread...
thanks for the info re sketch
I believe the relevance of this ongoing discussion is still around the Update Service and the relapse back to the original purchase version, losing all bug fixes for the year of cover unless Xara has issued a point release, of which we know of one.
I have not seen point releases at every version release. These would not be required if the silly reversion strategy was abandoned.
Acorn
Bug fixes should always be free.
I think it is wrong and dangerous attitude not to expect a bug free software. If people are willing to settle for something that has bugs, then it will be all that you will ever get. No one will invest time and effort for working software if they can instead sell same software that mostly works.
There are many software that have bugs fixed very fast after they are discovered and even if it may be wrong to say there are no software without bugs, there are still many that currently have no known bugs.
I'd like to know what they are because I have yet to find any software that has no bugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by theinonen
Bugs, no bugs or whatever..surely the point of this ongoing discussion is that Xara/Magix are not listening but have decided their loyal customers, decades in many cases like me, should adhere to the new wisdom they have deigned is the way to go, i.e. a subscription service which has no real customer continuity and is generally disliked by customers and is seen as dubious value and confusing. Why not just produce XD12 or 13 and issue a disk? It's not to make my life easier...is it? :-)
Just to be clear about point fixes ...
The version I bought was 15.0 which I considered needed the squash/stretch issue fixing. This was fixed in 15.1, but additional items were also added in 15.1.
So is 15.1 a "point fix"? or am I only entitled to 15.0?
Pauland is right, there is simply no such thing as bug free software, never has been, never will be. But we honestly believe we are better than most in both trapping and fixing - and of course our in-house testers are helped in achieving that by the beta program and posts in the Dear Xara forum (which it is one reason why it's important to try and keep on topic!).
Our policy for releasing bug fixes is described in the Update Service document mentioned above. But I’d also like to add that our policy hasn’t changed significantly from what it was before the Update Service. We used to release free patches addressing critical issues, typically soon after a major release – but if it happened that there were bug fixes after the next major version then you could only get them by buying an upgrade.
Kate Moir