Yet you won't say why the alpha isn't available through SD Central. Until Impulse completely replaces SD Central, please also add the alpha/beta etc updates there too.

That is the call for the developers on how they want to publish the updates. Stardock Central isn't phased out yet and it won't be any time soon. However I am just here to facilitate the comunications and tools to the customers. Right now this is the only way to get the product until the developers publish through Stardock Central or by other means. I will comunicate this request to them however since this is not the first time I have heard it.

Cheers

I'm afraid it's not their call. We buy the software = we sign their paychecks. I won't ask for them to put it on a DVD and mail it to me though. The SD Central is a widely-distributed tool with many more users than Impulse is at the moment. Therefore, it makes no sense not to make it available through SD Central as well. I'm not asking, I'm not suggesting, I'm demanding, because I don't see why it should be up to Stardock to tell me how to get the updates, especially considering that I already have SD Central installed.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I can't say for certain what the reasons are behind the current publishing agenda. At this moment many new releases, updates, and publishings are taking place. How those transitions will be made is entirely up to the heads of the company.

The update I am suggesting is completely voluntary. It is an alpha build that we have made available to you. How a voluntary build is distributed is really not up for debate. At the moment the developers are aware of the start menu issue along with other bug reports. However they do not work on Object Dock alone and require more time to correct the situation. The reason I suggest the alpha to our users is a test fix for the start menu was addressed in it. Since you have Stardock Central (and if you have not tried this already) you could uncheck the show prerelease box and update to the last full release version.

Please feel free to compare our track record of frequent and quality updates based on feature requests to any of our competitors.

I am sorry for the trouble you are experiencing and if there was something more that I could do on the matter I would. Please know that demanding anything from us is entirely unnecessary as we really do care for our customers and the community of Stardock/Wincustomize. We still intend to update and release more content for Object Dock.

Cheers

 

Seabass, you see that's the problem: lack of information. You don't know why they are distributing it that way and nobody from Stardock who knows is able or willing to shed some light on the matter. Just leaves us to speculate that it's probably because Stardock is trying to entice us to buy/extend Object Desktop. You say that "many new releases, updates, and publishings are taking place" are made, but herein lies a problem. Those updates are stable releases or significant upgrades and Object Dock seems to be missing out time and time again compared to other Stardock products. You say that those transitions are up to the head of the company, but I counter that by asking: do they not get our feedback and use their common sense and use the most widely-deployed platform to distribute those updates?

You say that the update you're suggesting is completely voluntary but I beg to differ. The way you put it sounds like we are being done a favour by Stardock to release this alpha and that's not the right. In fact, it's mandatory and the product has been left out long enough. I'm afraid the excuse along the lines of "they do not work on Object Dock alone" can't be used any more because it's been almost a year since a stable update has been published. Considering it's taken them 5-6 months to jump from 1.5 to 1.9 then it makes it even more puzzling. It seems then they worked on Object Dock alone to make that jump possible but they don't work on Object Dock alone any more. How can you explain that? Just show that Object Dock has been left out of the mainstream of updates for some unknown to me reason. Suggesting going back to a last full release is no good either because how would that help me discover more bugs for Stardock to fix? That's right, it wouldn't.

Considering RocketDock doesn't have time stamps on their changelog, I couldn't compare their product to Stardock's. However, as I've stated in my previous paragraph, I've compared the frequency of how often Stardock updates their software and, in comparison, ObjectDock is left out. WindowBlinds had MANY MORE updates in the past calendar year and they are already on 6.2 beta if I'm not mistaken. How do you explain that? What effort is Stardock making to live up to reputation it's created and now letting the expectations down?

I can tell you what you can do for me, since you're offering. Ask one of ObjectDock developers (Jeff B would be great) to come here onto the forum and say in plain English what is the status, why the hold-ups, why taking so long in comparison and stuff like that. Fill this void of information that's getting wider every day. Furthermore, how is not releasing stable updates for your own software for almost a year equals caring for your customers? It doesn't no matter how you look at it. Of all the software that I have installed on my machine, both freeware and paid-for, there isn't a single bit of software, apart from ObjectDock, that hasn't received a stable update in the past 12 months. What does that tell you? What it tells me is that people whom I don't pay to develop and maintain software are still willing to do so and do it more often than one of the companies whom I did pay for their software. It's just not good enough, in fact, it's disgraceful.

@Ivan
Although your post is a bit harsh, there definitly is a BIG point to it. Especially if licence of OD+ is limited to one year and than you need to pay again.

Some parts of this story do not fit ((

Additionaly - I tried impulse, it actually installs a newer version and some erros have been fixed, but the install is a mess - it doesn't upgrade a previous install although it says so - It just creates a new folder with a new version of OD, so you have two installs now - I hate it. Good thing was though - I did a truimage backup first, so I just saved the downloaded files, went back to before status and copied the newer files into the right folder - now I have a newer OD where it should be and some errors fixed ()

Ruben

One pays for a released product.  Not alpha or beta.  That's what you bought.  Anything else is extra.
If it doesn't work . . ask for a refund and be done with it.  No need to demand, no need to threaten.  Express yourself with your wallet and move on.

You have traded cash for product (and some services).  If you don't like it . . discuss with sales what value you have gotten and what product you have received and try to find what you really deserve.

This is a private matter and shouldn't be addressed in a public setting.

One does pay for a released product, you're right there. However, since we will all have to pay if we want to upgrade from 1.x to 2.x then it can be construed that it's reasonable to expect support and updates from 1.x to anything just before 2.x. So you aren't just paying for the product, you're paying for the product, updates and support over the course of its development cycle. It's a bit like renewing your anti-virus subscription every year. I'm sure you'd be pissed at Symantec or whoever for just selling you the AV software and not providing updates for a certain period of time, wouldn't you?

Asking for a refund is like applying a band-aid for a shotgun wound. It solves nothing. Stardock loses 20 bucks and I end up without a bit of software that can be better. So who ends up the happy man?

This is a private matter in as much as it affects me. However, I'm sure I'm not the only one that has problems. Stardock needs to give itself a reality check because so far it failed to address the concerns of its customers.

I also think that the idea of distributing the alpha of OD through Impulse is plain ridiculous. The way I see it is that you're asking your customers to give up a well-established and reputable distribution system and go for a not-so-widely-used, still-buggy, with-no-stable-release-yet platform to get something that has bugs in it. I completely fail to see the logic in that. It's like adding 2 negative numbers and expecting the sum to be a positive number.

 

No, you buy a LICENSE to the software = you have the right to use what you purchased.  That is the only right you have.

 

No, OD+ is like any other standalone product - you pay for the released version at the point of purchase.

That's comparing apples to oranges. ObjectDock+ is not part of Object Desktop.  It's not a subscription.  There is no promise of updates or new features.  When you buy it- you bought the released version that is available on the day that you purchased it.

The problem is that we tend to give updates (not just bug fixes) away for free.  In Object Desktop, that is a benefit of Object Desktop.  However, Object Dock is not part of the subscription.  Therefore, what we really should do is quit releasing alphas and only release bug fixes like other companies do.  Then we will hold everything for the next version...which is also the software norm.  Would that be better?

Also, just because there are not releases does not mean that the product is not being worked on.  You see more releases on Object Desktop because that's the whole point of the subscription.  However, NONE of our license agreements claim that every product will be updated frequently or even yearly.  All we claim is that you get updates, when available, during your subscription.  Standalone products don't even have that. 

 

Impulse is replacing Stardock Central VERY soon.  With that, releases will be made on it going forward.  People will need to start using the new system to get updates.  We're not going to keep two systems running in tandem.  This is no different than when we merged OD Component Manager and Drengin Network into what is now SDC.  We phased those delivery systems out just as SDC will be phased out.

I am not quite sure where you think that you have the right to demand how we provide updates or what our delivery mechanism will be.  It's fine if you don't like it.  You have the right not to use it, and you also have the right not to buy anything from us again.  The ~$20 that you spent almost 2 years ago does not give you any rights that you "demand".

 

If I recall correctly, then one of Stardock support representatives said in one of the threads here that I also have a right to expect what I've paid for to work properly. How would you address that point?

I'm not comparing apples and oranges. Just as you said, ObjectDock is a standalone product, but so is WindowBlinds. I can be part of ObjectDesktop subscription but it doesn't have to be. Since it's not a mandatory part of ObjectDesktop then why is it treated differently in terms of updates than ObjectDock if the license price is the same?

Holding onto the releases and bugfixes isn't the correct way of doing it. It benefits no one. What you need to do is be more proactive with your beta testers and provide more useful feedback and keep it a two-way street.

If there are no releases and no information about what's happening then you are creating an impression that makes ObjectDock user feel left out. Especially, if he/she sees other products updated. No, your license agreements don't promise updates but since you (will probably) ask people to pay to upgrade from 1.x to 2.x then it's reasonable to expect updates to 1.x as it's development nears 2.x. In a way, it is a subscription but in not so many terms. You don't pay in calendar-set instaltments but you pay per major version release. This certainly creates a case to expect that that version works 100% during its "lifetime".

Impulse is looking like a good product but it still suffers problems and that would make users reluctant to use it. As such, it makes all the sense in the world to use Stardock Central for the time being, especially when it relates to alpha/beta releases. People should get extra headaches when they're trying to get something that is trying to solve those they already have.

If it didn't work properly for you 2 years ago, then you should have requested a refund.  However, we have no guarantee that a product that you purchased 2 years ago will continue to work with current updates to OSes and drivers.

WindowBlinds has had a lot more versions to it than ObjectDock.  Part of it is due to it not being Vista compatible without it.  WB is also a very driver sensitive product.  It's a totally different product.  And, yes, you are comparing apples to oranges- you compared a standalone product to a anti-virus subscription. 

You don't actually buy much software, do you?  I have Photoshop.  I paid hundreds of dollars for it.  They have never given me access to betas of it for free.  They let me try out some new features on a time limited basis.  And, they don't really do many bug fixes, if any.  When a new version comes out, I have to pay hundreds of dollars more to get the update.  And you know what?  That's normal.  You ave a $20 product.  We put out fixes and updates for free when they are available.  It's more than most companies do. 

Again, it doesn't have to make sense to you why we do things. Impulse is replacing SDC, and we will not be updating SDC as we transition.   You have the right not to use it, and you also have the right not to buy anything from us again.  We are more proactive with our customers than most companies are.  If that is not enough for you, then there is simply no solution to your complaints.

So you're blaming the OS and drivers? Perhaps, instead of trying to pass the buck around, you'd work with Microsoft and driver developers to make sure that your products do work with all the updates. The problem is that for the past almost 2 years OD worked properly, but as you'd introduce more features it gets more complex and likeliness of problems is likely to increase. As such, problems arise and you need to solve them. So far, you've failed to do so.

It seems that you're admitting that WB is a driver-sensitive product and you're willing to work to solve those sensitivities but when it comes to OD there's hardly anything. That's what I call double standards. You misunderstood my "apples and oranges" comparison. When you buy Internet Security software in your local computer shop not only you get the license to use it but you also get a year's worth of updates. That's not a subscription. At the end of the year you can either buy a year-long subscription or buy a new product with a year of updates. While OD has no such calendar restrictions, Stardock does ask people to pay if they wish to upgrade from one major version to another. This does give a parallel to my IS software example earlier on.

First of all, if you work for Stardock then I'm surprised that Stardock doesn't license it from Adobe so you can get it for free. Considering that Adobe Photoshop is a very powerful product in itself then are you trying to imply that the less you pay the less you can expect in terms of updates? No, I don't buy much software. Mainly because there are freeware alternatives and because I'm not in much need to get software on a regular basis. However, if I do buy software I damn sure that I get my value for money and while 2 years ago OD was value for money, but right now it's value is decreasing.

Since you made a comparison to other software then allow me to make a couple of my own.

Just last week there was a bug in one of the extensions I use for Firefox. I notified the developer and had a fix on my hands within 8 hours of notification. I didn't pay/donate anything but still received great feedback and solved the problem quickly.

I also happen to own software from a company that specialises in removal of restrictions on DVDs and HD media. They always have to be on top of things and have stable/beta releases on almost weekly basis. That's what I call dedication, that's what I call wanting to do good things for their customer. Not to mention buying their software entitles you lifetime updates. What do you say about that?

Just have a look in Impulse section of this forum. It's flooded with reports of problems. May I suggest that until those problems are ironed out you don't distributed betas using Impulse. How can you call yourself proactive if all I'm getting from support is "this has been passed onto the developers"? How is that proactive??? Basically what you're suggesting is that if I don't like it then you're showing me the door instead of making me feel welcome at home and making sure that it's cozy. That's way too radical an approach.

 

Yes, I do work for Stardock- I am the VP of Operations.  Stardock does license it- but Stardock has to pay for it.  Somebody pays for the software, why would it matter who it is?  I still only get a few meager updates during it's version.

You paid $20 TWO years ago.  You say that it was value for your money TWO years ago.  And, somehow it has decreased i value because we didn't provide updates that you assume that you are entitled to?

I say that it's not the best idea to publicly state that you remove protection form DVDs and HD media since it's, well, illegal.

Support can't give you a new version if one doesn't exist.  They do pass it on to developers so that they can compile a feature list for the next update.  That's about all that can be done.  You have a 2 year old product that you are complaining about us not providing you an alpha on the delivery system that you prefer.  The alpha is there, yet you are complaining because it is not being delivered in the form you want it in.  There is nothing else that can be said.  If you want an update, then you need to get it through the delivery system that we are offering.  If you don't want to do that, then don't.  However, don't complain about not getting updates when one is available just because you have decided that we should provide it in a different form.

Since Stardock has many sources of revenue, it makes it easier to pay the license fee to Adobe. As such, part of my payment for OD+ contributed to the cost of the license for Photoshop. If you're aren't satisfied with Adobe's update policy then take it up with them.

Yes, I paid that amount 2 years ago. Yes, it was good value for money 2 years ago. I didn't assume I was entitled to updates. I think it was Zubas from Stardock Support who said that he felt that it's a customer's right to expect the product he/she bought to work 100%. This is currently not the case. An update is necessary to solve problem so why is it unreasonable to expect them?

I don't remove protection from DVDs, the software that runs on my computer does and where I'm from it's not illegal.

I am complaining that you don't provide an alpha version through the delivery system that vast majority of people who use Stardock's products have installed. Why not stop trying to tempt people to use a delivery system that's not 100% reliable and stick to the one that's been working well, at least for alphas/betas?

I'm not Stardock support.  But I do believe that you are entitled to have software that works as designed.  I do not set timelines though and I do not believe that demanding service is the way to go.

I think users have a right to and should report bugs.  I think software companies should try to fix them.  If they do not do so in a timely manner, users should not support that product or service or company.  I believe that the user should make sure that the company is aware why support is ending.  I think at that point a discussion might occur between the two to determine if any compensation is due.  After that  . . . the subject is closed.

As far as your complaint about delivery system of alpha or beta or any other software . . . that's not your call.  Stardock delivered your product to you when you bought it.  They now want to deliver newer (optional) versions through a new system.  You can choose to get those or not.

I don't how you can be complaining about a free, optional, upgrade.  You don't like the delivery method . . you can choose not to use it.  Then complain to yourself for making that choice.