Re: Uncle Bob Responds

[Michael Paauwe <mpaauwe@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Robyn, about your last post,

It seems doubtful that, at $249, your SC 2.1 qualifies as 'expensive software'. 

Since you "make your living with it", and it's had an amortized cost to date
of only $50 PER YEAR, why not just 'splurge' a little and upgrade to 4.0 for
a couple of hundred bucks and solve that big problem you have. If you value
your time at all, the cost of your writing about it here has now exceeded
your expected after-tax cost of an upgrade, and you are now in that part of
the yield curve that economists would refer to as the 'diminishing marginal
utility of time'. For a couple of hundred bucks who cares about the legal
ambiguity? Uncle Bob has already said it's not worth his trouble to do it
for legal and technical reasons and he's the only fellow around who appears
to know the difference between a Gregorian and a Julien calendar anyway, let
alone a modified-Gregorian type calendar like Omega uses, so what chance do
you think other mortals might have of solving that pesty Y2 problem at a
cost that you would apparently, by all expressed evidence, be willing to
commit to?     ;-))  

Sorry, just joking. Couldn't resist.
 
regards,

At 05:29 PM 2/23/98 -0500, Robyn wrote:
>Omega has indicated that it does not plan to fix any versions of SuperCharts or
>TradeStation except the current versions.  So users of earlier versions of the
>products are basically stuck unless they get a "fix" elsewhere.
>
>I've taken a look at the legal documentation I got with SuperCharts.  The
>Disclaimer of Warranty & Limited Warranty states:
>
>"If the software or written materials are defective, you, and not Omega
Research
>Inc., or its dealers, distributors, agents, or employees assume the entire cost
>of all necessary servicing, repair, or correction."
>
>I think it's pretty clear that expensive software which was written and sold in
>the 1990's - and which isn't Y2K compliant - is "defective" (i.e., not suitable
>for its intended use).  And since I as a user have - according to the
warranty -
>assumed the liability of paying for all "necessary servicing, repair, or
>correction" of "defects" - Omega is hardly in a position to complain if I
choose
>to get the software fixed and pay for it out of my own pocket (as opposed to
>suing Omega to get Omega to fix the product).
>
>BTW - if there's any ambiguity in these documents at all - it would be
construed
>against Omega - since Omega wrote the documents.  Robyn
>
>
Michael Paauwe
mpaauwe@xxxxxxxxxx