When the ObjectDockPlus version will be available for Windows 7?
Once again, it's a workaround, it's not a solution -- the fact remains that 32-bit OD can't access 64-bit programs, that's what SD need to be working on.
I just launched Media Player Classic - Home Cinema (64bit) from OD+. The only issue is that the running indicator isn't showing. So, claiming that OD can't access 64bit software is actually not entirely true.
That doesn't mean OD currently is 64bit compatible though, because it isn't, and Stardock doesn't claim it is either.
the same could be said for your need to comment in every thread you find about OD and saying the same things over and over.
I and other people wouldn't be complaining in this forum if ObjectDock worked bug-free and fully-compatible. Considering that it's not I don't see why people like me should stop voicing their frustration and disappointment.
1.) because you have already stated your issues with the program and made Stardock and the community aware of them.
2.) because it becomes redundant.
3.)because stating the same issues over and over in multiple threads won't magically make the problems go away quicker.
4.) because it becomes redundant.
5.) because not everyone wants to read your problem with Stardock/OD in every single thread they click on that has OD in the title
6.) because it becomes redundant.
7.) because common sense would say that hounding someone about something they are already aware of and working on is going to do more harm than good.
8.) because it becomes redundant.
I tend to go elsewhere if a product doesn't work as I expect it to and the developers doesn't listen. There are quite a few alternate docks you can use (few of them are actually better though).
Personally, I believe that they DO listen. But they have quite alot of work to do on all the software they're maintaining, and I don't expect them to resolv it all at once. Object Desktop is getting the main attention right now, and it'll likely remain that way for the next few months. I'm hoping they manage to sneak in an object dock beta in their schedule soon, but I'll not be surprised if we'll have to wait 'til first quarter 2010.
OD CAN access 64 bit programs, just not ones in the 64 bit System32 folder.
Also that workaround actually a solution?
3.) because stating the same issues over and over in multiple threads won't magically make the problems go away quicker.
1. Have there been any official acknowledgement or feedback on the bugs and issues that I've reported? No.
3. It's not meant to. I learnt that if one doesn't complain then nothing gets done. I also learnt that complaining once and then waiting for cows to come home is not an effective strategy either. My posts should serve as a constant reminder that problems that are meant to be resolved have not been.
5. If a person posts in a thread about his problems with OD and Win 7 and I have a problem, then why can't I share my experience with that person? How do I know that person already read what I said? Either that or he/she should post in the main Bugs thread.
7. How do I know that they're working on? No feedback was given. Last update was months ago. It was said that once Impulse gets an update Stardock would work on OD, but we heard nothing about it, so I won't assume that they're working on bugs that I've mentioned.
It's not 64-bit compatible. Let's leave it at that. If it was 64-bit would have already been put on the product page. That workaround isn't a solution because it involves user intervention. A solution would be Stardock fixing it so OD could access apps in 64-bit System32 folder.
Are there any apps that you personally want to access in the 64 bit System32 folder?
Not at the moment, because I have not upgraded to 64-bit Windows 7 yet. Will probably do it next weekend and let you of my experience then. In the meantime, there are plenty of Win 7 (and not just specific to that OS) bugs for SD to be busy with
So you're complaining about bugs you might get in something that you haven't tried yet...but will maybe next week?
Cool...
Im running win7 x32 ultimate since tuesday using od and havent encountered any probs whatsoever, my dock settings, drag to dock etc are as was in vista , would like to see more win7 icons though c,mon guys. Mr D. Arneaz this applies to you particularly
I'm just going to STFU...about that...
How about "I am eagerly awaiting Official 64bit compatibility as I intend to upgrade to a 64bit OS soon." ...
Microsoft should put ALL backward compatibility into an optional installation package. I don't want it. Because it's installed as default, there's no real motivation for coders to create fully native software.
That's a nice and politically-correct PR spin on the matter. However, as nice as that sounds, it makes Stardock's software development look reactive rather than proactive. After all, that's one of the reasons why Microsoft provide partners with pre-retail builds of their operating systems -- to ensure that their software is 100% compatible in time for retail launch. But hey, I'm sure you already know that.
Well, yes...it actually NEEDS to be reactive and NOT proactive, as it is the MS coders and not Stardock who create and modify the OS. Windows 7 may have been around for several months [I know I've been using it since about July on a permanent basis]...but what is deemed [By MS] as 'final' was/is the RTM which has not been out all that long. Revisions [by MS] to the OS break things so that rather than play catch-up with the MS coders it is [as many developers do] more sensible to hold back until the OS goes Gold.
There's a very good reason for that. In any bunch of 'users' you will find people who will not tolerate beta program failures/bugs and who will complain even more bitterly than the one or two voices crying "why isn't it out/supported yet?"
A little bit of confusion there. What I meant was that, if not possible prior to retail, once the OS goes Gold the software developement switches to being proactive, so that issues are fixed before the majority of end-users get their hands on it. Win 7 RTMed 3 & 1/3 months ago. I may be unduly harsh here, but I look at other software developers and software companies and they made and delivered on the claim that their software is compatible with the new OS. Sure, some of their software is more complicated than OD and some isn't, but it's a matter of perception. I feel compelled to ask: do you think OD's dominance of the dock market on the Windows platform made Stardock slightly complacent, which in turn meant that product quality level slipped?
Re: beta failures, not all betas are the same and it's difficult to manage users' expectations when it comes to telling them that it's a beta. On the other hand, if the developer engages with those intolerant/impatient people to carry out some root cause analysis and then feeds improvements back into the software then everybody benefits. The developer makes better software, which gives more value for money and that leads to more sales. The users feel appreciated and will put up with failures if their input is helping reduce the count of those failures.
No, I don't, but others might. Afterall not everyone is on the same page...all the time...
More often than not, Stardock limits access to betas to people who will be more willing to accept that what they are using IS a beta and thus may break things, mildly or 'dramatically'....such as Object Desktop Subscribers, people who typically have more exposure to and thus more experience with Stardock's range of software.
Skinners in particular tend to have more intimate knowledge and understanding of what to look for as an actual 'bug', as they are skinning for the program. SD's software development has always benefitted from skinner-feedback in particular so the development is/remains in good hands...
OK, allow me to rephrase the question, if you will: Do you think it is acceptable that one the main Stardock's products has not had a stable release in over 2 & 1/2 years, has such a log of documented issues and has not been officially declared compatible with neither Win 7 nor 64-bit architecture?
Being an IT person myself, I know of importance in managing users' expectations. I am also willing to accept that a beta is a beta and things may break and I'm happy to provide feedback so the development team can fix them. However, just because it's a beta that should not be used as a deterrent from people voicing their issues. Crucially, this process needs to be like a two-way highway and right now it's not, which doesn't mitigate the frustration.
I agree, skinners are indeed more likely to have intimate knowledge of what constitutes a bug, but most end-users of OD are not skinners. Therefore, to them "bug" = "unwanted behaviour" and that needs to be managed with a carrot instead of a stick. I appreciate skinners' input towards making the software better, but if end users are experiencing the same issues months after having reported them there's clearly a problem in there somewhere and it's not being solved.
Personally?
Acceptable? Yes.
Desirable? Maybe not.
I know of lots of programs which were released years ago....that functioned quite well...then....that do not now...and have had no further development either public or private.....all outside my control/influence...Sysmetrix is one.... Litestep [has always been one]....then there are literally HUNDREDS of other skinnable applications that have not seen renewal in years.
Would you like me to rattle them all off?
Whether or not Stardock releases revised versions...or limits possible beta testing to one group or another is all entirely outside my sphere of influence, and no amount of verbalising of frustration will likely make a huge difference.....unless perhaps it is from those who decide SD policy.
Now if end users are using a proggy, any proggy within an OS for which said proggy was not intended/developed then they should rightly expect "issues".
As for not officially being declared compatible with Windows 7 and/or 64bit that is clearly because there has been no released update of the proggy for X number of years....quite logical, really.
If attempts to use it on an unsupported OS fail or cause issues then I'd probably not use it.....
...until such time as there is an appropriate release...
No, I would not [personally] like for you to rattle them off. Then again, they don't appear in the top of Stardock's most popular software, like OD does -- at no. 5. It's a shame that this matter is outside of your influence, but perhaps you can get the attention of people who are the policy-makers and point them to this thread/forum (if they aren't aware already)? Thanks.
Sure, you're right that if end users use a proggy within an OS for which said proggy wasn't developed then they should not be surprised to come across issues. However, it's a "catch 22" situation -- end users won't know for sure whether they'll experience issues until they go ahead with the install. On the other hand, this could be a potential blessing in disguise. People who experience issues are best-positioned to provide feedback as Stardock tries to fix those hiccups. That way, it's a "win-win".
Normally, I'd agree with you that if a proggy fails or causes issues on an unsupported OS I'd abandon it. "Unfortunately", OD+ is a special case for me so I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. Throwing something out that I paid $20 for a few years ago isn't a solution in my head, yet the waiting game is getting weary.
See...there's the rub.
Years ago, when you purchased it...it worked, right?
Then time moved on...the OS changed....wasn't a 32bit of XP...suddenly it was a 64bit of Windows 7.
Is it the fault of the program that your OS is perhaps now incompatible?
The program didn't change your OS...
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
