Fw: Your involvement

[Fairlight]

On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 09:34:51AM -0500, after drawing runes in goat's blood,
Bud Henschen cast forth these immortal, mystical words:
> Nothing beyond 5.6 is set in concrete.  The next item to be released is 
> fPBiometric which should allow you to develop applications with finger print 
> recognition allowing for enrollment and identification and door control 
> running with filePro on the servers.  Hopefully, this will get us into the 
> SCO Unix and Linux markets. We are waiting for Ken to finish 5.6 and move 
> him to interface the messaging, which is mostly finished, into filePro. 
> This should allow you to enter a market which is still in the early stages 
> and according to various publication going to have tremendous growth within 
> the next ten (10) years.

This leap of faith is based on a huge assumption.

It assumes other Windows apps won't be around, interfacing between *SQL
databases and the biometric scanners.  If -native- (and I mean non-console)
Windows apps are available--or worse yet for fP, some with SDK's that will
let you write it in the language or app of your choice--then fP is going to
lose that war -really- quickly, and it will be a lot of investment down the
drain, PLUS the time wasted on it that could have been poured into the core
product that is presumably the staple of the company.

I appreciate the long-term view as much as the next guy, but banking on
something that's supposed to have growth over the next ten years doesn't
seem to be helping fP-Tech -now-.  Since you admit you don't read the list,
let me advise you that no less than two people in about 3 weeks have stated
they're leaving filePro either partially or entirely behind for lack of
development progress on modern features.  This does not bode well for
ignoring the short-term, especially when you want -upgrades-, not
abandonment.

Seeing as fPBiometrics is really Windows-only, it can't really be deemed
part of the core product, can it?  One would think the core product would
generally assume dominance on the development chain.  There is a laundry
list of features that people want -yesterday-, and you're chasing a future
uncertain potential for a single platform that isn't even helping preserve
your current userbase.

This seems unwise to me, on the whole.

> fpXML will also be released in 2006 or 2007 depending on development time. 
> To get filePro to be open and communicate with other databases, etc. this 
> will be very important.

Since it will be Very Important[tm], could you please give a description
of what it will actually do?  Preferably on the mailing list.  Exporting
fP-based data is already dead simple.  I can only hope for my clients'
sakes that it's an actual import wizard that honours both DTD and Schema.
It would be nice to hear at least some preliminary details on what the
intended functionality is outlined to be at this point in time.  If you
know it's very important, presumably you have more than just the name
worked out.  This is the kind of, "What will we be able to do in 2 years?"
kind of question to which people want fuller answers.

> With the release of the above, we will be including "wish list items" and 
> "memo printing" which we will be reviewing, after the release of 5.6.   I 
> would like to post a listing of wish list items and see if it is necessary 
> to spend the time and resources to develop or if someone in the FP community 
> currently has a work-a-round that can be implemented and we can move to 
> another item.   Remember, we have to look at the needs of the entire 
> community and not just one or two individuals and justify the return on 
> investment.  This may not meet with all your approval, but if one item 
> results in a $100,000 return and another item results in $1,000 return, then 
> you know where the resources will be directed.

I would advise that simply because there's a workaround does -not- mean it
is sufficient.  There are many workarounds that would be far more
efficiently added to the core engine.  The very term "workaround" implies a
shortcoming of the product, and an inherent need.  Workarounds can be
elegant, or they can be truly ugly and barely functional--but more
functional than something entirely broken/missing in the real product.  

I don't think the mere existance of a workaround should be grounds for
immediate disqualification.

> Please don't ask for time-lines, since I do not have any projections at this 
> point.

No timelines.  Just features.

Okay, you've outlined four areas of direction for fP:

Biometrics (I daresay 90%+ here on the list won't even care)
fPXML (an unknown, since no planned-feature details are provided)
overcoming screen size limitations (good)
addressing printers in some unspecified fashion 

That's all the hard info you've given.  At that point, on behalf of
everyone begging for Features X, Y, and Z, I have to say, "That's it?
That's your current set of goals for filePro?"

To be fair, no it's not.  You've asked about getting the list of
workarounds to evaluate what should and shouldn't go into development.
Okay, that's fair.  One problem:  The wishlist contents aren't actually
known to everyone here, or even probably the majority. fP-Tech receives
items, and to my knowledge, short of "tricking" Howie's software into
giving out the entire list, there was no point of dissemination.  So not
many people likely know what's been suggested that they could give that
kind of feedback.

Further, even if they had the raw item list, they have no indication of
your current idea of priorities as regards implementation.  They don't
know that you're seriously planning on implementing item #37, for which
there's a workaround that's sufficient, but you're barely even considering
item #102, which is far more desperately needed.  (Obviously hypothetical
feature numbers.)

There's a communications failure creating an information shortage, and it's
going to hamper your efforts to obtain information in return.  Barring
input, you'll make your own calls in a near vacuum, and stand a 50/50
chance of calling it right.  (Based on the extent to which Biometrics
has become an apparent drain on resources, probably worse than 50/50
as far as the current userbase is concerned.)  Then, typically, you'll
probably remain silent about the direction you're taking until you're near
a possible release date or ready to beta test.  Then you'll announce the
feature set that's to be released.

THEN the fur flies.  Mostly because people were kept in the dark, kept from
being involved, and it won't have been their fault.  I'm sure they'd -love-
to help you, Bud.  But you need to make the resources available with which
they could effectively do so.  If you don't, the offer of participation in
the direction of filePro is a hollow one indeed.

> BTW thank you to many of you who wrote regarding to the new webpage and 
> other inquires.  As I said before, I do not monitor the list since I have to 
> get other things done, but if you have a direct question, I will do my best 
> to give you an answer.  Please use mgmt at fptech.com so that I can separate 
> from other company email.

I'll CC this.  I think it's important that you get the larger picture of
where I think you're shooting yourself in the foot on communications,
and potentially on direction.  Mind you, I'm not the world's best
businessperson--hardly!  But so much of what's going on is extremely and
(to me) self-apparently anti-productive for everyone, and yet could so
easily be remedied.

And maybe you didn't see it, but the web site is -still- insecure and open
to attack via fpcgi as of the writing of this letter.  Just looked at the
web page source again.  Maybe you missed the security-related information
because you didn't read the reply post here.  In that event, please read
the post as archived at this URL:

http://diablo.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/2006-January/011457.html

I think you should probably get someone to address the security concerns
voiced in that post.

Strictly speaking, when you ask for suggestions in a public forum, you're
supposed to actually expect replies via the same channel.  You -can-
request them offlist, but it behooves you not to.  For one, not everyone
can follow instructions, so you'll inevitably lose input from at least
some vectors that may have valid points--even if the person espousing the
valid ponit is too clueless to follow instructions.  For another, it's bad
ettiquette unless the topic takes the forum so off-topic as to be a huge
disruption.  I'm fairly confident that next to nothing you'd deign to post
regarding fP would fall into this category.  Indeed, I think -anything-
further you have to say on the product's future is eagerly awaited.  I'm
honestly surprised JPR hasn't called you on this practise of demanding
replies in private, as it used to be one of his pet peeves.  It makes sense
for a few things.  It doesn't for most.

Now, I could assume you didn't see the security information because, "[You]
don't read the list."  I could also infer that you did see it, and security
isn't an issue for you or your company.  This is the dichotomy of opinions
you create when you -insist- on taking half your communications private and
ignoring the public half to all intents and purposes.  Yet I'm pretty sure
you -don't- want people thinking you don't take security seriously--who
would?  And yet, the situation exists.  Unfortunately, it's a situation
only you can remedy.  I'm trying to give you advice here--what I consider
sound and reasonable advice.  I can't make you listen, I can only try and
convey the importance of transparent, open, and consistent  communication.

> See ya!

How, when you self-admittedly don't read the list?

Bests,

mark->