Well said Colin.
Pat, K9JAUAt 10:38 AM 12/16/2014, you wrote:
>well it's obviously not impossible is it lol.
>And I expect that this issue, as rare as it may be, speaks to some of the
>greater issues with the JFW product over the past few releases.
>I know that sending out the wrong cd might be a completely different issue
>than problems with the software itself, but those problems tend to over lap
>into a general discontent with the product in it's current form.
>And while I'm not going to get into a technical discussion on specific bugs
>and problems, I will say that FS hasn't revamped JFW and fixed many of the
>integral issues that have plagued it for years and years.
>It's still the #1 screen reader on the market hands down, but one would
>think that after 20 plus years of development, some of the major stuff would
>have been fixed by now.
>So a comment like what is fs trying to pull has some resonance with those of
>us who feel that product development has been poor of late.
>It isn't a matter of poor logic, or sheer bloody mindedness on the part of
>the commenter, but an expression of a general feeling towards the product
>and company for some of the frankly rediculous oversights in programming and
>development.
>And yes, I realize resources are limited and all the rest of the stuff that
>goes into software development and the companies involved therein and the
>struggles they face.
>But I don't think I'm the only one on the plannet who feels, that after
>being a JFW user for 20 years, we are ready to see some major improvements
>to software that is hugely over priced in todays market...and that we are a
>bit wierry of release after release with minimal bug fixes as well as new
>bugs that effect our daily use of the software in a work environment, and
>the same old upgrade scheme for going on 3 decades.
>Please don't try and make us feel that FS is just some upstart company with
>some altruistic desire of helping out blind people to access their
>computers.  That changed many years ago and the ship has long since sailed.
>FS is a money making entity with seemingly limited regard for their customer
>base because that customer base has little alternative and is mostly driven
>by tax payer dollars and not by the end consumer.
>I also dont' think it is appropriate for a representative of said company to
>start a pissing match with the end customer about his or her feelings on the
>product or the company.  It isn't the right place to engage in such a
>conversation.
>If I were to take your comments to heart, I would now believe that being a
>fellow ham, and JFW user, that I must now drink the coolade, and shut up and
>not voice my opinions or thoughts on issues I face every single day and that
>I should just be glad that someone, in this case a multi-million dollar
>for-proffit organization, is nice enough to provide me with some kind of
>access and that I shouldn't want or expect more out of them.
>This would be appropriate thinking if FS was a non-proffit small
>organization struggling with limited funding and limited resources to try
>and make something new and usable...but that is really not the case.
>When you are representing the top dog in a software field, you have to
>accept the good and the bad and not try and debate on a personal level the
>marrits of someones discontent.
>If this is how FS responds to less than glowing comments or responses, then
>no wonder there is discontent.
>
>73
>Colin, V A6BKX
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Miller
>Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 8:40 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Off Topic: "Heads Up To Those Installing Jaws 16 via the CD
>
>Hello everyone,=20
>I don't know what happened with Tom's installation of JAWS 16, but would
>ver=
>y much like to learn more. I have contacted Tom off-list, and hope to talk
>w=
>ith him directly to get more details.
>
>"Quality control" is very high on the CDs we distribute. Before any CDs for
>d=
>istribution are produced, a "Gold Master" disc is created after the content
>a=
>nd actual CD which will become the physical master is tested for any
>physica=
>l defects and integrity of the digital content. The likelihood of the JAWS
>1=
>3 executable being included on the JAWS 16 CD is extremely small, not
>someth=
>ing I would even consider possible. We have shipped thousands of these CDs
>w=
>ithout any issues being reported with regard to their content or usability.
>=
>I am hoping that Tom will help shed some more light on what might have take=
>n place.
>
>Matt, to directly address your second comment:
>What exactly would Freedom Scientific be "trying to pull?" How could
>sending=
>an installAtion file two versions old benefit anybody? Do you think it coul=
>d somehow cause the company to get more money, or increase sales? I've
>parti=
>cipated in this list for many years, have exchanged comments, given and
>rece=
>ived advice, even committed to pray for a few folks over the years. I'm
>disc=
>ouraged to see that fellow hams, who are usually a pretty logical lot, so
>ea=
>sily question the integrity of others based upon an isolated incident,
>espec=
>ially without knowing what response arises from such an incident.
>
>If anyone else receives a defective JAWS 16 CD, I would be very glad to
>hear=
>about it and personally see to it that it is exchanged for another disc. If=
>anyone wishes to contact me directly I can be reached by the email address
>u=
>sed on this list, or at my work address:
>[log in to unmask]
>The response will be much faster if my work address is used because, with a
>2=
>-year old at home, I do not have the time to always check my personal email
>d=
>aily.
>
>I hope everyone has a very Merry Christmas, happy New Year and a blessed
>hol=
>iday season. I hope to get some antennas up in 2015 and see you all on the
>a=
>ir.
>
>73,
>Ron Miller
>N6MSA
>Tarpon Springs FL
>
>
>
> > On Dec 15, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Matthew Chao <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >=20
> > Wow!  That reallhy is poor quality control.  Or, are they trying to=20
> > pull a fast one?--Matt, N1IBB.
> >=20
> > At 07:19 PM 12/15/2014, you wrote:
> >> All:
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> I know some will consider this off topic, but I thought I would post it
> >> h=
>ere
> >> as well as to the Jaws list.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Hopefully, it will prevent someone else from going through what I did at
> >> work today.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> From: Tom Behler [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 7:14 PM
> >> To: 'The Jaws for Windows support list.'
> >> Subject: "Heads Up To Those Installing Jaws 16 via the CD
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Hi, all.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Today, I attempted to install Jaws 16 on a new computer at work via the
> >> C=
>D
> >> that was just shipped to me, and ran into an interesting issue.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Even though, according to one of my sighted colleagues,  the CD was
> >> clear=
>ly
> >> labeled Jaws 16, the actual installation file was the executable file
> >> for=
>
> >> Jaws 13.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Obviously, Freedom Scientific quality control is not working very well.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> What I had to do was go on line to download and save the executable file
> >> f=
>or
> >> Jaws 16 onto a thumb drive, and then do the installation from there.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> I contacted FS about the error, and insisted that they at least send me
> >> t=
>he
> >> CD with the correct Jaws version on it.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> When I asked them if they had seen anything like this before, they said
> >> t=
>hat
> >> my case was not the first.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Will see what happens from here.
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> Dr.  Tom Behler from Michigan
> >>=20
> >>=20