realbasic-betas.mbox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: REALbasic 5.5.3 Available

To: REALbasic Betas <realbasic-betas at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: REALbasic 5.5.3 Available
From: "Thomas Kaltschmidt" <rb_tk at gmx dot de>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 11:21:30 +0200 (MEST)
Delivered-to: realbasic-betas at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <S dot 0000332916 at mail dot tempel dot org>
Hi Thomas,

guess the leak in RBScript is no quick fix, either.
While i agree that using RBScript is a basic functionality which should
certainly run without leaks, are you sure it was without problems in 4.5.3?

And since the weather is getting hot in germany the next days: Try to calm
down a bit, so you get not overheated ;-)

Thomas




> Jonathan Hoyle wrote:
> 
> >Presumably a 5.5.4 could be released if absolutely necessary, but my
> guess 
> >is that both REAL Software, as well as the RB user community at large,
> are 
> >anxious to get 6.0 underway.
> 
> Well, my personal desire is to get finally, after waiting about 1.5
> years, a new fully working RB version that I can use to replace RB 4.5
> for compiling my only and quite large project.
> 
> Until now, every released RB version had some serious issues, and most
> of them were bugs or changes that were not present in 4.5 yet.
> And, note this - I've been using NO new features. It's all things that
> got broken and then it sometimes takes a lot of work to convince RS
> to get them fixed again!
> 
> Half of the problems I had to work-around, with some of the others it
> took me a lot of begging and waiting to see them fixed, and still, after
> all this time, I'm stuck with 4.5 because performance and stability
> with RB 5.5.3 is still not sufficient or at a level I could get to
> with 4.5.3 (with quite some difficulties there, too, though. Some
> things I could solve only by quite fishy hacks).
> 
> The last problem I found, which is a long-standing leak with RbScripts,
> was not fixed because it seems too difficult to be fixed (Dave:
> "If it were easy and safe to solve then it would have made 5.5.3",
> and for 5.5.4 he said was not sure if it would be fixed, either).
> 
> Well, that probably means I'll have to wait for RB 6 to get this one
> fixed and then find 5 newly introduced bugs again, find them one after
> the other in a long process, and see at the end of the beta cycle once
> again that only 4 of them did get fixed, like every time I went thru
> this whole cycle?!?!
> 
> I've paid for RB 5, I've almost paid for RB 5.5 and I'm still not
> getting an update that can do what 4.5.3 did. RB 5 has so far been
> entirely useless to me for that matter. I only have one big project
> and RS is not able to get it stable. No surprises here from my side,
> since all stuff that used to work!
> 
> Do I hear "get in the dev program and get a quick fix"? I paid several
> 100 dollars already only to be even able to verify that my program runs
> in 5.5 - that was the otherwise useless purchase of RB 5 for Mac and
> Windows!
> And then I hear I should even pay MORE for RS getting their own stuff
> fixed that they broke earlier? When I'm buying an update I expect
> that I get something that works at least as well as it did before.
> But this has for long not been the case for me any more.
> 
> And still, when I blow up again and get pissed and voice my
> discontent, I get to be the bad one, but never RS, eh?!
> 
> This sucks!
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thomas Tempelmann,
> http://www.tempel.org/rb/
> http://www.tempel.org/software/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Search the archives of this list here:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
> 

_______________________________________________
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>