RE: Eric Damery's response to my Blog comments
- From: "Alan Clendinen" <alanclendinen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:02:19 -0400
Barry,
If you were unable to use a version of JAWS due to its incompatibility with an
accessibility program that you absolutely had to use, wouldn't you feel
cheated by the FS demand that you pay for the SMA for that unusable version of
JAWS? That is exactly what I faced with two consecutive versions of JAWS. They
were unusable because they caused the MS Sticky Keys utility to malfunction. I
could have chosen not to purchase a SMA covering these two unusable versions,
but if I later wanted to buy a SMA that covered a new upgrade that was usable
with Sticky Keys, I could not do so unless I also purchased a SMA for the
earlier unusable versions. Furthermore, Microsoft doesn't charge anything for
its patches to Windows. In the case of serious bugs in JAWS, however, the fix
may not be offered as a free patch. Instead, FS will fix the bug in a new
upgrade which uses a SMA, so you are in reality being forced to pay for what
should be a free patch, and also pay a SMA for all previous unusable versions.
do you really believe this is a fair deal?
Alan
Barry wrote in part:
For the others who think that freedom is wasting SMA's
solving this problem you are quite incorrect. All you have to do is look at
the what's new for each version that comes out. They are fixing as much as
possible and adding new features as the market demands. All software is not
perfect look at Microsoft who patches windows each month.
Other related posts:
