Re: Reports Background engine failures

From: Jerry Alan Braga <>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:46:52 GMT
Message-ID: <05lri.83215$xk5.69558_at_edtnps82>

Right on Preston, this is what make me sick about Oracle, Microsoft and others. They say, when it broke replace it don't fix it.

Or worse, we have a new one, the old will not work any longer and you are stupid to support it.

Microsoft and Oracle are the biggest liers even with that. Microsoft till very recently or even to this day still still use DEC Vax Clusters for some of its internal systems that they will not trust to their own Windoze clusters and OS.

I know that you should stay as current as possible for all the right reasons but like you we are not a big shop so when the wims of people like Larry and Bill start flying around people like us have to think what body part is next to leave behind in order to get there.

WOW, I started this thread to get some feedback but I am sure glad to know I am not they only one in this.

"Preston" <dontwantany_at_nowhere.invalid> wrote in message news:FPfri.178$
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:12:55 GMT, "Preston"
>> <dontwantany_at_nowhere.invalid> wrote:
>> > Careful Daniel, you're getting dangerously close to Sybrand levels
>> > of arrogance with that post.
>> >
>> Doesn't the label 'arrogant' equally apply to someone calling himself
>> 'Preston' . After all it is 'Preston' who decides his customers should
>> remain in the dark.
> Wrong on both counts - it's not my decision & our customers aren't in
> the dark.
>> > You know absolutely nothing about our customers, nor what's
>> > important to them.
>> What is important to your customers is a supported version of the
>> database, a supported version of the O/S and a supported version of
>> the hardware.
> Again, wrong on every count. What's important to our customers is
> software that works & meets their business needs, & which is supported
> by *us*. You obviously think you know more about our customers
> requirements than they do themselves, which frankly doesn't surprise me
> (hence the 'Sybrand levels of arrogance' comment).
>> Otherwise they will, when theire servers fall apart, because someone
>> called 'Preston' advised them not to upgrade, not only pay big bucks
>> to replace their servers, but they will be also be forced to upgrade
>> their O/S (as their current crap isn't certified against the new
>> hardware), and their software, including Oracle, etc, etc, etc,
> Well done, you've managed to get that wrong too. All our clients use
> 'modern' hardware, recent OS & Oracle The only 'unsupported'
> software they use is Reports 6i, which is of course supported by us as
> the supplier.
>> Maybe some customers don't understand this, as they have never been
>> informed by someone called 'Preston', but then someone called
>> 'Preston' 's software policy is full of 'Pennywise, pound foolish'
> Actually it's full of functionality requested by the clients to enable
> them to run their businesses. But I'll ring them all up today if you
> like & tell them the next release will be delayed a couple of months
> because Sybrand says they don't really know what they want, & he knows
> better - I'm sure they'll appreciate that.
>> Likely this will put him out of business someday.
> Yes, that's right. The fact that we've been supplying these
> applications for over eleven years without ever hitting a 'show
> stopping' bug means it's 'likely' that we'll go out of business because
> of one.
>> I can't say I will regret this.
> So you'd be happy to see a company go out of business, leaving the
> employees without a job, just because you don't agree with their policy
> regarding one very small part of their application? You really are a
> nasty piece of work aren't you.
> --
> Preston.
Received on Mon Jul 30 2007 - 14:46:52 CEST

Original text of this message