bBrowser: Pit Stop

Absolutely unexpectedly, I found out that my last article caused rough discussion. Readers were divided into three unequal groups: one counted my article as a sneer company, others – certainly supported, and the third – preferred to remain the silent audience.

Last week I already «put an end» and was switched to other project. But discussion didn't end. Therefore, having found time, decided to speak.

bBrowser exists and develops long enough. It is the brilliant project. But, it has problems. Both old, and new. Product this paid. All paid things it is possible and should discuss publicly. We discuss in the market of sellers and their goods? Is it normal. Is inadmissible to speak about what isn't present, it is forbidden to "blacken" the goods and the seller. It is necessary to understand everything. And if don't understand – to study.

Therefore, all reproaches that it is impossible to discuss problems without the author – are silly. The statement that only the author can decide that a mistake and that isn't present – deceitfully. To such critics I would advise to buy more often the goods only to the discretion of the seller, without bargaining. And if will find defect – to discuss it only with the producer (with the author) – the main thing "not to rustle". It follows from your words. :)) And if it suits you, me - No.

In what essence of old problems? With them it is possible to live. We live with the quarrelsome mother-in-law, we work with cunning suppliers, we suffer the harmful neighbor... It is life. But, if you want to change something in it - it is necessary to operate together. To avoid the self-deception possibility, the best way – to collect an essence of the claims and to state them aloud in a circle of experts. If experts confirm your claims – can safely write the letter to the producer. I and made.

What features old problems have. Most often old problems remain because users with them are reconciled. There is such expression: «the mistake described in documentation – becomes feature of work of the program». And the second reason – that causes a problem, already uses nobody. And if it is necessary to nobody, it isn't necessary to anybody. Therefore the second sense of my article – to learn, whether uses it still somebody except me.

Still the group of claims to me is reduced to that I called (described) only 10 problems. But, I know more … Therefore, I shall (is simply obliged) to transfer all to the author. Very interesting claim. It is meaningful, but I will easily refute it. I wasn't employed to work as the standard tester and the critic of the project. To me for it don't pay. The second, I speak to the point. I.e., I specify a problem and I offer the decision. How many it is necessary for time to examine all project, to describe all errors and to tell, what it is necessary to correct? You thought of it? Cheaper and quicker to write the new project. As speak at us: «a flag to you in hands, a drum on a neck!»

If you want to discuss with me, the problems found you – welcome to comments! I think, together we will find the decision.

Forgive, time to go! Let's meet on the finish!

30.05.2012.   Pencil (Карандаш).