From Frogboy
"Maybe it's because I'm a sick, scummy, evil capitalist who eats babies when I'm not on here flaming web hippies but what is it with non-producers constantly asserting that other people are greedy for not working for them for free."
"That's one of my biggest peeves with the Internet. We now have an entire generation of web hippies that not only expect other people to work for them to be free but have the audacity to accuse those producing stuff of greed if they refuse to behave like proper slaves."
"In an age where there are fewer and fewer people making stuff (skins, software, you name it) it strikes me as extremely ironic that anyone who doesn't make stuff thinks they're in any position to be demanding others work for free for them."
I'm just going by statements like the one above. The true "irony" seems to be that someone who gets contributions, for free, is increasing the price of software that allows people to make content for this person, his companies, and his companies software. I don't have to generalize what I see on other sites. The owner speaks for himself. Even when someone is "lucky" enough to make money off of their artwork here, they have to submit a large number of free skins first. Even then, Frogboy takes a cut of the money. I'm not sure you could find any other example of "looking out for #1" that would compare to this. This site is an island. The fact that "there are fewer and fewer people making stuff" might be due to the impression that Stardock believes it is owed content. Who is the hippy then? You can all convince yourselves that I am wrong, but you can't convince the thousands of other people you have sent away from here with a bad taste in their mouth. There is absolutely no self inspection going on. It's always about what is wrong with the person complaining. Never what is wrong with the company. If anyone dare speak out about it, they are scolded into oblivion.
As far as the bug being fixed in the latest version...this "seems" to be true. BUT, you are the first one to tell people that they shouldn't use beta versions unless they are willing to suffer the consequences of being on the "bleeding edge" of technology. It's
pretty crappy that ANYONE should have to look to a "beta" program to fix the flaws of a
supposedly "stable" version. Many people would never get that far.
IF Stardock did know about this problem, and fixed it, it was their responsibility to inform their users. Not mine. I *could* have posted my problem here, but there was no way of knowing that VD was the problem until I ruled all of the others out. (Keep in mind that there were a TON of programs bundled with this PC, but THEY weren't the problem)
It could be that the problem was fixed entirely by accident too. It's also quite possible that this bug was introduced because they are trying to make this program work well with Vista & didn't bother to fully check in to the programs stability in XP.
Either way, I did more than I got paid for. Sorry if I flamed a corporate hippy. (or hippycrit as the case may be)
You can fool yourselves, but it is clear that you aren't fooling a lot of people. Hence
the drop in submissions, lamented by the owner of this island.
Me? I'm just happy I could fix the problem that my purchased software created. Thanks to Stardock & WinCustomize for nothing.
Even the "Evil Empire" releases hotfixes. Stardock just releases "betas" without admitting any problems or faults. Imagine if all software companies did this. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Is that just a catch phrase for those you don't like?
It's sad. I really thought I would like it here, but having taken a cursory look through these forums, I'm not the only one who was disappointed by the way things work here.
Just fix the freakin' software. That's all I ask. The rest will haunt you in time.
