Filepro is NOT Antiquated Software - Filepro is Business for us.

[Fairlight]

Four score and seven years--eh, screw that!  At about Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at
01:56:56PM -0600, tony freehauf blabbed on about:
> I believe I should never see a negative idea like Antiquated Software
> on this list, unless it's the other guy we are talking about.  Negative
> ideas waste my time and your time.  I believe the function of a list like
> this should be to promote Filepro Sales & Filepro Programming.  I think

"Nothing can exist in a vacuum."  --Peart  (possibly reiterated)

You state that the goal of a venue like this should be to promote fP sales
and coding.  Okay, I agree.

However, to promote fP sales, fP must grow as a product.  If you focus only
on its current strengths and feature set, it will not grow.  If you focus
additionally only on the narrow range of features that -current- users
need, you'll sell more upgrades but not make it all that much more
appealing for prospective buyers.

However, if you -compare- it to other things and look at the grander
picture, you start to see whole new vistas where development direction
could go.  A lot of those can be exciting places for growth.

You need to look at the 'negative' aspect of what's missing to see what
should be added to enhance the value and bring in new customers.  Let's
face it:  If what fP is -right now- were enough, there'd be a steady influx
of new customers and growth would not be a worry.  What there is,
currently, is a legitimate concern about shrinkage within the userbase.  I
take Walter Vaughan's stated pending departure from fP as a rather ominous
portent, for example.

Looking at what's missing need not be 'negative' in the sense of bashing.
Granted, that's happened a lot in past and present.  Guilty as charged on
this end, no question--I've done it.  But it needn't be that way, either.

One can easily perceive it as bashing even when it's not.  Try instead
thinking of it in architectural or artistic terms of "negative space"--you
shape what's there by looking at what isn't in those terms.  Same thing
here.  You're using the knowledge of missing/needed features to achieve
something bigger and -construct- something with a broader appeal that will
float the proverbial boat.

And that's constructive, overall, even if it comes to occasional blows.

> on this list.  I think we should all be grateful for Sue who is the good
> face of filepro to the world.  I think we should be grateful to Ken for
> his great programming.  I am grateful for all the help received.  I do

Everyone likes to be appreciated.  Being -extremely- grateful to Ken is
rather obvious--he goes above and beyond.  

> wish this list was Business only, not entertainment for those who do not
> like our beloved Filepro.  I wish this list was monitored and did NOT
> allow the flames or anti Filepro messages.  If someone does not like
> Filepro, I don’t need to know that.  I need to know positive information
> about the business of using & programming Filepro.  

I said it the other day:  Censorship is one of the first recourses of the
party holding the lower moral ground.  

Something that cannot stand up to honest, open debate is not worth having.
That applies to principles held, physical goods that don't pass muster and
fall apart, or software that has shortfalls (and ALL software does--even my
own beloved code has things I want to fix/change--ran into one just last
night, actually).

In keeping with the notion above regarding dissection and discussion being
the only way to make significant progress, some shortfalls NEED to be
discussed.  It doesn't make the current release any more or less viable
than it already is, to have that discussion.  It doesn't retard sales, and
in fact (if acted upon) would potentially raise sales.  It doesn't remove
fP from anyone's hard drive, nor does it force them to migrate if they
don't want to.

So what is it you fear in an open, honest discussion about filePro?  You
say "business only"...hell, I -am- in business.  I support people that use
filePro 24/7/365.  And yet, I'm pretty sure you have a problem with some of
my posts by what you're saying.

It sounds like what you want falls more along the lines of a place of
worship than a place of productive discussion.  Whenever someone really
cannot stand to hear a dissenting viewpoint to the point that they advocate
(or implement) censorship, it takes on the aspect of being dogmatic to the
point of being religious.  The same thing has happened to science.  It's
become politicized and dogmatic to the point of being more religion than
what it purports to be, paying only lip service to its original intended
goals.  I could recommend some good reading along those lines.  Try reading
up on what happened to Emmanuel Velikovsky.

One of the problems in -making- filePro grow over the years has been
overcoming the seemingly religious overtones of many in the community that
take the stance that fP can do no wrong.  If they -were- doing it all
wonderfully, fP would have decent market share, wouldn't be showing signs
of an erosion of userbase, and would actually have the resources to develop
the product without laying people off and shrinking to a core far
diminished from what was present in 1993 when I got into filePro.

> I think the owners of
> Filepro should provide a Filepro list that is monitored & is bias toward
> Filepro.  The competition deserves no promoting from Filepro people.  I
> think if you have a problem with Filepro you should contact management,
> off list.  What good is done for the owners & users of Filepro to allow
> the promotion of the competition?

You -want- a biased list, stacked towards a predetermined viewpoint?
That's not scientific, it's not logical, and it -is- dogmatic.  I can tell
you this:  That way does -not- lay progress.

What you're proposing is, in effect, baking the results to fit a
hypothesis.  Your hypothesis is that filePro is perfect or as near as makes
no difference, and you're not only willing but -eager- to shut out the rest
of the world's progress, knowledge of working in heterogeneous
environments, and in fact most of common sense in software analysis and
design as evidence that points to the contrary, all in order to "prove"
your hypothesis.  That's entirely the reverse of how it should be done.
Those attitudes belong back in the Dark Ages.

I -do- agree that fP needs to start and maintain their own mailing list for
official-only communication.  From what I hear, the problem has always been
in determining who to allow on such a creature.  Do you stop at the
developers or include end-users and third party developers of middleware?
Direct licensees only?  I mean, where's the line?  But I agree that they
should be providing their own resource.

However, they also haven't, in 13 years that the web has been available to
them, managed to even put a bug tracking system online--something much
requested by many people, and something far more critical IMHO.  Their
focus needs to be on what will give them the most immediate tangible
benefits.

Not so incidentally, such a list would be useless if it, also, followed
your suggested format.  They already -know- what people think they're doing
right.  Getting them to listen to what's wrong and fix/improve/add is of
paramount importance.  To create a forum that allowed no dissent or
critical review and analysis would be to create a meaningless void of
narcissism.  Keeping "problems" only discussed with management creates
redundant problem handling, eats time and money on their end, and serves
nobody when known issues are kept under cover of darkness.

> Thanks for listening

I always listen.  I don't always agree.  With good reason, many times.  I
hope you can at least see, if not appreciate, the logic of the counterpoint
opinions I'm expressing.  At least mine -is- logical.  Yours is loyal to
fP, I'll give it that.  The only other thing I can say is that it borders
on creating a virtual religion centred around the product.  That kind of
backward momentum is not needed.

Then again, I doubt you'll see the logic.  Or if you do, you'll deny it.
The religiously devout with so much vested in things that they'll do
anything to make things fit their worldview rarely see or admit to seeing
the logic of other points of view.  It's called emotional vested interest.

Last I checked, emotion doesn't move product, or bring in dollars.  And
that, as a business, is what fP-Tech is about in the end.  As we all are as
businesspeople.

Bests,

mark->