Bug tracking requirement

[Giblet535]

Please have an interactive bug tracking system online by end-of-business on Friday October 24.

Next weekend, I'll decide whether to abandon ScriptCase for my trial project, based largely on whether NetMake can meet a single easy deadline.

That deadline above is easily met by NetMake at absolutely no cost, and very little effort.

I suspect that NetMake has spent too much time working with Microsoft and they think that Microsoft is the ideal business model: ship it whether it works or not, maybe fix it later, ignore the customer complaints, rinse, repeat.

Ask Steve Balmer how that model is working out for him.

[aducom]

Is that a threat? Sorry but don't expect that SC will follow your request, I've been trying for years. I even offered to enable our mantis on scriptcase.eu for that. But things are moving as the resellers are in action on bugs and other things, but 24th... No then you can decide today.

What's important is that if you know the product well enough you know the weak and strong points. We are able to produce large applications and like RHS we have no real showstoppers. Bugs, yes, but we can work around them. It still saves us a lot of time. But support of SC and quality control are subject for improvement ... eh to say it nicely. But even with the time we loose on work-arounds, we still have a lot of time savings in the overall development. We learned the hard way and share our knowledge where we can. Everybody decides for him/herself.

Building at the core php or java is imho not an option. Other php producers have other challenges ;-) Believe me, I know.

[Giblet535]

No it's not a threat.

It's an ultimatum that works to my favor either way.

I'm asking (politely) for NetMake to provide a feature that I need by a specific date, and if they cannot meet that request, then I will be forced to make other arrangements. Those arrangements are sitting right here on my desktop. Installed, licensed, and patched to date. My team is briefed, as is my project management team. Next week, instead of wasting time with ScriptCase, we'll spend re-scoping the project.

I agree that NetMake is unlikely to satisfy this one, very simple request. I need a solid reason in order to change project infrastructure this far into a project. If NetMake wants to play the bumptious child and hand it to me on an ether platter, perfect!

I want ScriptCase to be the product that NetMake advertises. That is the short path to project success, but SC8 is useless in its current state. My QA team thinks I hired the ObamaCare web developers, and my beta clients think it's a joke. I've tried to help NetMake improve the product by reporting defects as I encounter them. None of them have been fixed that I'm aware. There is no indication that NetMake will or even can fix those problems.

So let's assume that NetMake ignores my request: I can use the time NOT wasted working around ScriptCase bugs to design business intelligence or reporting functionality, knowing that it is backed by rock-solid database interface grids and forms that I don't have to worry will break every time I make a change.

If NetMake fulfills my request, then I have a different kind of political leverage: When QA comes to me and asks, "What the heck is this garbage?!" I can say "That is issue #NNNNNNNNN, here's the link, and at last check, the vendor will take care of it."

It's business. Business is seldom rainbow ponies and unicorns.

[aducom]

Thread / ultimatum...That's a matter of definition. Not that I disagree though, but everybody has their own reasons to do things and I'm the latest to argue about that. But I stay with my opinion. You don't need to wait until the 24th, you can act now instead. But imho of course.

[Sardius]

Giblet535, I hear you. If I could get my money back I would be over the moon. I would move on to something else. I am now close to writing off the wasted expenditure and pursuing something else anyway. I take my hat off to Albert for keeping a positive attitude in the face of the challenges presented.
For me workarounds are unacceptable to the degree that it is happening in SC. You buy a tool for rapid development and workarounds make the word rapid a complete joke. I have bought two components recently from competition and to my surprise their support has been incredible. One email question - one email solution in response. They are foreign too but language does not seem to be the excuse they hide behind. Requesting a status update - I did not need to, the enhancement request was in the very next release. So there are products out there where quality and service are paramount. I do think SC could take a few notes from their competition if they want to be successful. I fear that if a big company like Blackberry can fall, SC can too. The way things are going...

[aducom]

That would be a sad story, but on the other hand the truth. I don't want to hide the problems SC has on Quality and assurance side. But the truth is that for the apps we build the workarounds needed are *very* minor. If it wasn't we would quit immediately. That doesn't mean that we are blind or ignorance. We do have other options open. But on the other had we have made significant investments on apps build in SC. And currently we only have to move a few of our apps to V8, but they all worked without major adjustment. Again, we don't develop for mobile phones, only tabs.

So it depends on your application if you 'hit' the problems. We came out to SC because of deep disappointments of similar issues on competators. On the application side SC is the compatators far in front. On the support side there's a lot to improve, but I can tell you stories about other products you won't believe. Nothing new there. Only it's not for this forum.

[aducom]

@Giblet535: I opened a public Mantis to store issues into (see sticky post). It's not the magical thing solving all issues, but at least we have a common place to store issues, follow them and discuss with SC. It has been on our minds (Giuseppe and I) for quite some time, and originally we wanted to create a bugtracker in SC and publish that. We already have mantis installed on our system for our own (customers) use, and we don't see time to develop it in SC. It's not opened to change your mind, but I still would appreciate if you would put your bugs into it.

[Giblet535]

Thanks Albert. That is an excellent - and generous - gesture on your part. Your time and effort are appreciated.

If this was an Open Source project, that would be an ideal solution: the project development team would use your Mantis installation right away (after the usual bit of arguing) and it would become the default bug tracking mechanism for that project.

ScriptCase isn't really a project. "Project" implies organization, structure, and planning, none of which are evident in this product.

NetMake fixed one of mine on Friday. It was an easy one, recently reported, so it appears that bug fixes are "cherry picked" from the list of defects. The easy ones get fixed first. That, all by itself, is a great reason to abandon ScriptCase, because that is why tough bugs - the bugs that our customers see - will never be fixed.

I'll think about it. This is a busy week.

[aducom]

I won't argue with that, as I have a lot of similar experiences, only I am closer to SC than most of you and have some more insight. But I'm not going to defend SC as I think that there's only one way of solving the annoyance: by fixing bugs, leaving out new functionalities, being open on the issues being worked on. It's not a shame if some bugs are difficult to fix, but at least be open so we know. I go for action, not words. Somehow the message is still not load enough to SC I'm affraid :-(

[Sardius]

Albert, I struggle to believe that they care. It is looking more and more like they only care about the sales and not about the retention of clients.

[aducom]

Albert, I struggle to believe that they care. It is looking more and more like they only care about the sales and not about the retention of clients.

I can imagine that very well. As I wrote here on several spots, I'll look at the action and not at the words. And so far it's lacking of action... But I haven't given up yet.