|
A lot of these are important, but I won't buy anything anymore without trying it in my own environment first. I've been burned by salespeople overselling the product on more than one occasion. You can exaggerate the feature list, you can oversimplify the documentation, you can give it a crazy low price, but you can't fake a trial.
|
|
|
|
|
Ed Leighton-Dick wrote: you can't fake a trial
Tell that to O.J. 
|
|
|
|
|
Agree ... No trial and no buy.
|
|
|
|
|
... thanks for the feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
Does this mean
1) We can vote again, since we've a new option?
2) Too late - ha ha (so now poll is even more skewed?)
3) "Documentation?" - we don't need no stinkin' documentation!
And, whilst we're adding new (but inaccessible?) choices, let's add the choice that everyone wanted - but were afraid to mention: the package with the hottest cyber-chicks wearing equally hot kilts, gracing the sales brochures.
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
|
|
|
|
|
I selected other, because my primary criterion was not on the list, and I'm appalled that it is *not* on the list. It *should* be the first thing on the list.
Documentation
David Wright
Senior Developer
IC Group, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
What's that?
Personally, I love the idea that Raymond spends his nights posting bad regexs to mailing lists under the pseudonym of Jane Smith. He'd be like a super hero, only more nerdy and less useful. [Trevel]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist
|
|
|
|
|
I know that everybody would like to believe that documentation is unnecessary, but every profession has its albatross. I'm sure vintners don't get much of a charge out of corking wine bottles, either, but its got to be done if the thing is going to be a finished product. If it's for your own use, you can drink from the vat if it suits you, but if its for somebody else, cork the bottle.
If I am going to spend a half-hour searching for a library, then to make it worth my while it had better take me about 10 minutes to implement it out of the box and it had better work right. Then it can save me time and money and I'm happy to pay somebody for the effort they put into it. If I spend the half-hour looking and then have to spend a day grovelling though source to figure out how to use it or a week finding and reporting bugs so the author can make it work right, then it is a waste of my time, and I won't take it for free. I can write it myself faster.
David Wright
Senior Developer
IC Group, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes, you simply cannot take the time to thoroughly investigate and drill every aspect of a new whatsit.
Having a contributing community backing a product says a lot for it as well as giving me more of a security blanket for finding quick answers to the unforeseen gotchas.
No single raindrop believes it is to blame for the flood.
-irresponsibility@Despair.com
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. One of the first things I do when looking at some new software product, whether commercial, free or open source, is see how active the forums are - and also whether most reported problems have solutions.
If a product receives timely updates this is another sign of confidence. But I would place the above higher.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
It must be a quirk of my brain that I can pick up the usage of a component from an example within microseconds, but find it so incredibly hard to wade through verbose bloated textual explanations.
Since I normally need a component for something a little out of the ordinary I need to see the extremes of what it can do as well... if I didn't I'd code it myself.
Many components do not come with real world examples and only demonstrate at the "this is how to create a folder" level. 
So, give me a decent manual with a few tricky examples to learn from (and let me see what the component is capable of doing in the hands of the expert who wrote it) 
Dave
Software Developer
|
|
|
|
|
Is it comparable with my brain function - or not.
Price helps in a perverse way: I've MSDN from employer in a Windows shop with several hundred XP workstations. MSDN upgrades - like the latest Visual Studio are thus top-sellers for the likes of me. And then, of course, there's the SourceForge.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"It's a sad state of affairs, indeed, when you start reading my tag lines for some sort of enlightenment. Sadder still, if that's where you need to find it." - Balboos HaGadol
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't make a program to work your way, it means it doesn't work at all. That include how does it look and what features will it have. Everyone must have an opportunity to write feature, even most "simple users" will just use features, not write them.
So what you need is:
How to write a tool?
How to remove a tool?
|
|
|
|
|
Stability is the most important quality.
Many components look nice but when starting to play with some become unstable which points out to the "matureness" of the product.
In small software pieces this isn't so important but in enterprise software stability is a must.
Also, the average time it takes for the support team to fix a bug or add a simple feature.
|
|
|
|
|
Gilad Kapelushnik wrote: Also, the average time it takes for the support team to fix a bug or add a simple feature.
And in that process they should ensure that it does not break any earlier fixes or introduce more bugs.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep!
|
|
|
|
|
The biggest question for me: will this component become a deadweight in the future?
That means either a reputable owner who can be expected to still exist and maintain this product in five years or a good customer base so I can expect that even if the vendor goes down someone else will pick up and continue the product or source code.
Now, source code seems to be the most reliable answer. However, this makes modifying the lib tempting - which in turn makes upgrading a pain.
Personally, I love the idea that Raymond spends his nights posting bad regexs to mailing lists under the pseudonym of Jane Smith. He'd be like a super hero, only more nerdy and less useful. [Trevel]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, whether the company will die, or new version does not compatible with old version
Regards,
unruledboy_at_gmail_dot_com
http://www.xnlab.com
|
|
|
|
|
For a small feature that I myself could write in say a couple of hours but lack the time to do so due to an approaching deadline, I'd happily pay 10-25 bucks since it's cheaper to buy it.
For a very complex, feature filled library (example the Dundas stuff, DevEx etc.), that saves me days and days of work, effort, testing... I'd be willing to pay much more.
|
|
|
|
|
Usually I mix price, features, testimonials and trial version in my decision making process; I don't chose things only for one reason, never.
Sometimes my filter is much more definite than one I mentioned above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, certainly a new low. 
|
|
|
|
|
What is the MOST important?
|
|
|
|
|
well it's hard to say : what do you prefer : living with 15 meters arms or with a Calf head ?...
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
