I understand your point since I spent 10 years in OS/2 software
development. But we bent over backwards and then some to maintain
backward compatibility.
Chuck Norcutt
Moose wrote:
> On 7/6/2010 11:26 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> Sounds a little like ACR except that Adobe doesn't have the excuse
>> of obsoleting old stuff for new features. :-)
>
> Well, I know there's a smiley. I don't like Adobe's upgrade pricing
> policies any more than anyone else here, maybe less. And I've said it
> before. But here I go again, quoting myself:
>
> "Still, as a sometime software developer, and entirely a one man
> show, so I know every aspect, I suggest another perfectly good
> reason.
>
> There is little more frustrating, when adding/changing functionality,
> than dealing with a fixed data file format or data interface. I can't
> imagine over all the years of development of ACR/PS that significant
> changes to the data/software interface haven't been needed several
> times. But then the new PS can't communicate with the older version
> of ACR, and vice versa.
>
> Once you make that change, you can't do backward compatibility
> without rewriting all the older versions of either PS or ACR. And
> that just makes no economic sense at all. I can't see ANY business
> spending lots of time and money to go back to rewrite old software
> just so folks don't have to upgrade. "
>
> Repetitive Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|