Anyone care what I think?

Timothy J Luoma luomat at peak.org
Wed Sep 17 04:26:46 PDT 1997


	Author:        Ken Case <kc at omnigroup.com>
	Original-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 23:00:47 -0700 (GMT-0700)
	Message-ID:    <199709170557.WAA10902 at ignem.omnigroup.com>

> I apologize if anyone found my comments rude--that was certainly not my
> intent.

Ken: I was sender of the mis-sent message, and I didn't think it was rude.

> I was merely trying to point out that if even _I'm_ not interested in
> hearing about bugs in beta versions of OmniWeb 2.x, it's pretty unlikely
> that anyone else on the list is. (After all, I happen to know that the
> people maintaining OmniWeb 2.x aren't subscribed to the mailing list, and  
> they're probably the only people who might be more interested in OmniWeb
> bugs than I am.)

My message DID go to the OmniWeb2 list, as you can see from the message in  
my OutBox:

> From: Timothy J Luoma <luomat at peak.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 97 00:12:09 -0400
> To: omniweb2 at omnigroup.com
> Subject: Crash report (2.7b3)
> cc: omniweb-l at omnigroup.com

However, looking at the copy that came through the list, it looks like the  
message was sent TO omniweb-l and NOT sent to omniweb2.

So I'd complain that your list software mucked with my message, but  
otherwise it is inconsequential.



My reasoning: if someone else was seeing the same crash on a regular basis,  
I'd want to know about it.  Because I didn't know at the time that the 3.x  
code was split from the 2.5 code, I had no way of knowing that the 2.7 bug  
reports were not going to be all that helpful in 3.x.

OmniWeb rarely crashes.  When it does, I'm very surprised, and I guess my  
mind took a short break.


I've sent ever crash report to omniweb2 with as much info as I could.


I will happily continue to support OmniGroup, even if they decide to start  
*selling* single-user copies of OmniWeb.

NetScape support sucks rocks.  They don't want to hear from people who are  
using the academic version of their browser, which you STILL have to pay for  
(I think) and which is not fully featured (OW is not crippled, even for the  
single-user license).

OK, let's get over the ranting, and back to work.

If I wasn't offended at the reply, I don't see why anyone else would be.

TjL




More information about the OmniWeb-l mailing list