Studio MX 2004 released Support Product Page
This topic was archived
Macromedia - Get Your act together
Posted 15 Sep 2003 12:49:05
1
has voted
15 Sep 2003 12:49:05 gunni grahn posted:
2004 is a step in the wrong direction!- i mailed this to Macromedia - but i am shuremacromedia will NOT respond - as allways <img src=../images/dmxzone/forum/icon_smile_sad.gif border=0 align=middle>
Macromedia You have just lost my confidence! My small company rely on dreamweaver, but this is a farce. Considered the usual upgrade, downloaded the demo.
Installed - it worked for 24 hours then never showed up when dubbleclicked- just received a jumping icon. Never had a chance to test if my bought extensions would work.
Tried everything from removing extension to reinstall of dreamweaver. Nothing worked. Last resort after visiting your help pages on the net - fresh osx installation.
Then - "your trial period has ended" THIS SUCKS. How can i make a living from something this flaky? I dont dare upgrade - ever, unless you change the trial procedure and prove that dreamweaver works.
You present this upgrade under a new number, and charge for it - very well, but why didnt you
fix all the bugs in version 6.1 first? I feel compelled to share my experience with my fellow developers - but will rectify and stand
corrected if you can prove me wrong or present at much better experience - any way possible.
This way you exclude me - and everyone else with this experience, from being in front of web development, just because of a crappy demo/install procedure - no matter what you state
on your registration page.
I am frustrated, angry and very very disapointed as i have seen you as a webdevoted, professional program developer - until this. Sad - very sad!... and absolutely unacceptable.
Sincere
Gunni Grahn
P.s. Earlier i bought UD1 which actually was unavble to perform a javaconnect as stated in the manual.
After months of argumenting with you, Your english representative confirmed that the problem was replicated, and you offered me a sidegrade to a pc version - which i did not want as i bought a mac version in the first place and do not want to buy a pc to run your software.
After many more months you provided me with version 4 for mac - and my faith in you was restored. So it was under MX, but now???
Replies
Replied 15 Sep 2003 12:52:34
15 Sep 2003 12:52:34 gunni grahn replied:
Reflecting on all my problems on trying to get dreamweaver 2004 demo to run, i stopped to reflect on Macromedia´s new policy and recomandations to active and future customers - and i must say i became outraged!
Think about it - first they state that the new online/phone registration procedure is something they worked out with their users. I was never asked - where you???
I should think that people was indifferent to getting a new registration method as the old one worked just fine. I was
This is something stupid they thought up for their own good - nothing else - and it doesnt work. They have a page (that i cant find anymore) where they state their customers are very happy with this new non intrusive procedure - lets talk to these customers please - i dont think they exist at all.
More stupidity:
on this page:
www.macromedia.com/support/service/ts/documents/elapsed.htm
they state:
"The copyright protection scheme created for Macromedia trial software is highly sensitive to changes, and to attempts to change the system clock. Automated virus scans can also trip the trial mechanism, so it is best to deactivate them for the period of the trial. "
What company in their right mind would ask for their customers to deactivate any virus protection for 30 days in order to try their products ?!?!? What are they thinking? Will they pay any damage due to virus attacks?
They must get their act together and at least go back to old procedures until a more stable AND safe way to provide demos for their users.
What can macromedia say about this?
regards
Gunni Grahn
Think about it - first they state that the new online/phone registration procedure is something they worked out with their users. I was never asked - where you???
I should think that people was indifferent to getting a new registration method as the old one worked just fine. I was
This is something stupid they thought up for their own good - nothing else - and it doesnt work. They have a page (that i cant find anymore) where they state their customers are very happy with this new non intrusive procedure - lets talk to these customers please - i dont think they exist at all.
More stupidity:
on this page:
www.macromedia.com/support/service/ts/documents/elapsed.htm
they state:
"The copyright protection scheme created for Macromedia trial software is highly sensitive to changes, and to attempts to change the system clock. Automated virus scans can also trip the trial mechanism, so it is best to deactivate them for the period of the trial. "
What company in their right mind would ask for their customers to deactivate any virus protection for 30 days in order to try their products ?!?!? What are they thinking? Will they pay any damage due to virus attacks?
They must get their act together and at least go back to old procedures until a more stable AND safe way to provide demos for their users.
What can macromedia say about this?
regards
Gunni Grahn
Replied 17 Sep 2003 15:13:22
17 Sep 2003 15:13:22 Jason Greene replied:
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.
Replied 17 Sep 2003 16:28:56
17 Sep 2003 16:28:56 gunni grahn replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I am glad you share my point - i hope many more do - and bother to post acomment - only this way we can hope for "micromedia" to change things.
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I am glad you share my point - i hope many more do - and bother to post acomment - only this way we can hope for "micromedia" to change things.
Replied 18 Sep 2003 19:01:07
18 Sep 2003 19:01:07 Darren S. Eyers replied:
Personnaly with MM software I would perform a full Drive Image of the machine with PowerQuest Drive Image before installing there products to ensure they install. If any problems restore the drive image and install the software again or even use due boot to test the software trial for evaluation purposes.
Software is PC hungary, probably the developers using wrong variable data types or something! Why is it so hungary. A 400Mhz should be good enough for the software with everything else closed, heck MS Outlook isn't too bad on lower spec PCs and that is buggy software!
As a developer I would be imparesed on how slow Dreamwaver MX is if I created it.
Software is PC hungary, probably the developers using wrong variable data types or something! Why is it so hungary. A 400Mhz should be good enough for the software with everything else closed, heck MS Outlook isn't too bad on lower spec PCs and that is buggy software!
As a developer I would be imparesed on how slow Dreamwaver MX is if I created it.
Replied 19 Sep 2003 01:16:08
19 Sep 2003 01:16:08 Steven Kent replied:
As a dedicated DW user, I hate to say it, but DW 2004 (30 day trial) seems to be a classic case of "nice look, shame about the function". I'm using a 1.6 P4 with over 700M of RAM, yet DW 2004 still locks up / freezes / shuts down in the middle of things that are rather benign (e.g refresh file list). DWMX is a very very good product, but I'll be waiting to see what if anything MM does in response to feedback before I consider upgrading.
Replied 19 Sep 2003 05:15:26
19 Sep 2003 05:15:26 gunni grahn replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Personnaly with MM software I would perform a full Drive Image of the machine with PowerQuest Drive Image before installing there products to ensure they install. If any problems restore the drive image and install the software again or even use due boot to test the software trial for evaluation purposes.
Software is PC hungary, probably the developers using wrong variable data types or something! Why is it so hungary. A 400Mhz should be good enough for the software with everything else closed, heck MS Outlook isn't too bad on lower spec PCs and that is buggy software!
As a developer I would be imparesed on how slow Dreamwaver MX is if I created it.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
To backup the drive with drive image might work beautifully for pc-users, but unfortunally us mac users doesnt have anything similar, unless we want to make a cumbersome backup to some external media.
But after all this shouldnt be necessary - "Micromedia" should provide software that works as stated in the first place. And again - they havent fixed DWMX6 yet - so they shouldnt release a version7 - a fix for 6 should be their primary concern, BEFORE they begin to charge people anything.
Personnaly with MM software I would perform a full Drive Image of the machine with PowerQuest Drive Image before installing there products to ensure they install. If any problems restore the drive image and install the software again or even use due boot to test the software trial for evaluation purposes.
Software is PC hungary, probably the developers using wrong variable data types or something! Why is it so hungary. A 400Mhz should be good enough for the software with everything else closed, heck MS Outlook isn't too bad on lower spec PCs and that is buggy software!
As a developer I would be imparesed on how slow Dreamwaver MX is if I created it.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
To backup the drive with drive image might work beautifully for pc-users, but unfortunally us mac users doesnt have anything similar, unless we want to make a cumbersome backup to some external media.
But after all this shouldnt be necessary - "Micromedia" should provide software that works as stated in the first place. And again - they havent fixed DWMX6 yet - so they shouldnt release a version7 - a fix for 6 should be their primary concern, BEFORE they begin to charge people anything.
Replied 19 Sep 2003 05:31:49
19 Sep 2003 05:31:49 Mike Hazard replied:
<font face='Verdana'>My question is this: does the slow performance of all of the new products have anything, and I mean anything, to do with the activation scheme that's running. A few software companies have tried product activation in the past and ran into problems, and I just hope (for MM's sake) that the problems are not related to activation. While I appreciate MM's desire to ensure that the products they put time/money into making are not stolen, I'd hate to think those of us who support them are getting screwed because of this desire. </font id='Verdana'>
Replied 19 Sep 2003 05:39:25
19 Sep 2003 05:39:25 Mike Hazard replied:
<font face='Verdana'>Oh, a few more questions: can we have a time frame for the patch for all of the new products? While I love the new features, my productivity is way down now that I've switched to 2004. I'd like to know when I can expect the problems to be taken care of.
Question 2: why were these products released. I think that's a fair question. It's obvious from the PR scramble MM is engaged in that they're hearing a lot of complaints about the new release, and I can only assume that if management listened to both the beta testers and the engineers at MM, they would have heard that the products weren't ready...so why were they released? I was as excited as anyone to get my hands of the new software, but would have happily waited another month to get stable versions.
Question 3: How is MM planning on working on the patches? What's needed here is not a simple maintenence patch, so how will MM work with the developers, designers, etc who use and rely on their products in the coming weeks. Will we be involved in the patch process at all. Will MM supply us with a list of bugs that will be addressed?
</font id='Verdana'>
Question 2: why were these products released. I think that's a fair question. It's obvious from the PR scramble MM is engaged in that they're hearing a lot of complaints about the new release, and I can only assume that if management listened to both the beta testers and the engineers at MM, they would have heard that the products weren't ready...so why were they released? I was as excited as anyone to get my hands of the new software, but would have happily waited another month to get stable versions.
Question 3: How is MM planning on working on the patches? What's needed here is not a simple maintenence patch, so how will MM work with the developers, designers, etc who use and rely on their products in the coming weeks. Will we be involved in the patch process at all. Will MM supply us with a list of bugs that will be addressed?
</font id='Verdana'>
Replied 19 Sep 2003 06:29:29
19 Sep 2003 06:29:29 gunni grahn replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
<font face='Verdana'>Oh, a few more questions: can we have a time frame for the patch for all of the new products? While I love the new features, my productivity is way down now that I've switched to 2004. I'd like to know when I can expect the problems to be taken care of.
Question 2: why were these products released. I think that's a fair question. It's obvious from the PR scramble MM is engaged in that they're hearing a lot of complaints about the new release, and I can only assume that if management listened to both the beta testers and the engineers at MM, they would have heard that the products weren't ready...so why were they released? I was as excited as anyone to get my hands of the new software, but would have happily waited another month to get stable versions.
Question 3: How is MM planning on working on the patches? What's needed here is not a simple maintenence patch, so how will MM work with the developers, designers, etc who use and rely on their products in the coming weeks. Will we be involved in the patch process at all. Will MM supply us with a list of bugs that will be addressed?
</font id='Verdana'>
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Great point here - but saddly - my own experience with "Micromedia" is that they dont fix software at all - You buy it and your stuck with it as it is. Dont expect even crusial bugs to be ironed out. Expect them to take your money though.
<font face='Verdana'>Oh, a few more questions: can we have a time frame for the patch for all of the new products? While I love the new features, my productivity is way down now that I've switched to 2004. I'd like to know when I can expect the problems to be taken care of.
Question 2: why were these products released. I think that's a fair question. It's obvious from the PR scramble MM is engaged in that they're hearing a lot of complaints about the new release, and I can only assume that if management listened to both the beta testers and the engineers at MM, they would have heard that the products weren't ready...so why were they released? I was as excited as anyone to get my hands of the new software, but would have happily waited another month to get stable versions.
Question 3: How is MM planning on working on the patches? What's needed here is not a simple maintenence patch, so how will MM work with the developers, designers, etc who use and rely on their products in the coming weeks. Will we be involved in the patch process at all. Will MM supply us with a list of bugs that will be addressed?
</font id='Verdana'>
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Great point here - but saddly - my own experience with "Micromedia" is that they dont fix software at all - You buy it and your stuck with it as it is. Dont expect even crusial bugs to be ironed out. Expect them to take your money though.
Replied 19 Sep 2003 16:14:59
19 Sep 2003 16:14:59 Warren Beatty replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I scan for viruses, but I think the problem lies with apps like Norton AV and their auto-protect feature. I can't use auto-protect due to my HP All-in-One - they just don't gel together. I know numerous people have had various problems with auto-protect and DW. I personally dont care about auto-protect - I'm using broadband with a hardware firewall and haven't seen anything creep in. I DO use incoming and outgoing email scanning via Norton though.
Warren
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I scan for viruses, but I think the problem lies with apps like Norton AV and their auto-protect feature. I can't use auto-protect due to my HP All-in-One - they just don't gel together. I know numerous people have had various problems with auto-protect and DW. I personally dont care about auto-protect - I'm using broadband with a hardware firewall and haven't seen anything creep in. I DO use incoming and outgoing email scanning via Norton though.
Warren
Replied 19 Sep 2003 16:55:01
19 Sep 2003 16:55:01 gunni grahn replied:
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I scan for viruses, but I think the problem lies with apps like Norton AV and their auto-protect feature. I can't use auto-protect due to my HP All-in-One - they just don't gel together. I know numerous people have had various problems with auto-protect and DW. I personally dont care about auto-protect - I'm using broadband with a hardware firewall and haven't seen anything creep in. I DO use incoming and outgoing email scanning via Norton though.
Warren
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
It is not about the antivirus software - its about Macromedia having changed something that worked fine up til now. Demo versions have NEVER before been influenced by antivirus software.
I must protect my customer and the website visitors against virusses the best i can - and it is absolutely unacceptable that Macromedia opts for this new activation procedure - thereby trying to force anyboddy that wants to run their demo to deactivate protection.
Demos worked fine before - so they must go back to the procedure that worked eariier - leaving everyboddy protected as they should be.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Asking any user to not scan for viruses to run the software is bad enough, but it seems completely moronic to ask that of web developers.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
I scan for viruses, but I think the problem lies with apps like Norton AV and their auto-protect feature. I can't use auto-protect due to my HP All-in-One - they just don't gel together. I know numerous people have had various problems with auto-protect and DW. I personally dont care about auto-protect - I'm using broadband with a hardware firewall and haven't seen anything creep in. I DO use incoming and outgoing email scanning via Norton though.
Warren
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
It is not about the antivirus software - its about Macromedia having changed something that worked fine up til now. Demo versions have NEVER before been influenced by antivirus software.
I must protect my customer and the website visitors against virusses the best i can - and it is absolutely unacceptable that Macromedia opts for this new activation procedure - thereby trying to force anyboddy that wants to run their demo to deactivate protection.
Demos worked fine before - so they must go back to the procedure that worked eariier - leaving everyboddy protected as they should be.