When a hardware product fails demonstrably to operate correctly, the phrase "It doesn't work" is applied without qualification. All sapient bipeds will agree that the device in question is in fact, unequivocally, definitely, not working. The justifiably disgruntled owner will then ask the retailer, "Can you fix or replace this faulty machine that you sold me please?" with a reasonably high expectation that their wishes will be granted.
When software fails to operate correctly — ie. it crashes — all traces of sapience evaporate. The air hangs heavy with talk of System Extension (INIT) conflicts and hardware incompatibilities. Then comes that old chestnut, the totally irrelevant: "WELL OUR SYSTEM WORKS OKAY". Would you accept that response from Dixons regarding a faulty VCR?
For customer, retailer and distributor, the practical consequences of software bugs are no work done (so no income), hours of fiddling, and days of peak rate international telephone calls.
Eventually a free 'maintenance' release or a costly 'upgrade' emerges. The new release either fixes the bug (that apparently didn't exist and in any case wasn't the publisher's fault) or the game begins again.
Even more frustratingly, some software bugs are non-repeatable, making proof of non-functionality an impossible task. However, it seems that even repeatable bugs do not, as far as some publishers are concerned, constitute a program that "doesn't work". Why? How many current Mac models does an application have to crash on before it is declared 'not working'? Is it fair exchange that a loyal customer should be made to act as an unpaid beta test site? Isn't this an untenable situation?
On behalf of an increasing number of disgruntled end users. I'd like to suggest that, like a faulty VCR, software that repeatedly crashes a current Apple Macintosh model (running only Apple Extensions) is a (soft) machine that quite definitely DOESN'T WORK. Afflicted customers should have their money refunded, or their faulty software exchanged for an application that can cut it.
Putting it less emotionally, it's clear that some kind of legally binding framework needs to be set up to protect both the end user and the retailer/distributor, whose margins are soon swallowed by telephone or personal customer support.
"With the likes of Digidesign, E-magic, Passport, Roland and Steinberg all signing up to help develop OMS, Opcode anticipate that future versions will offer serial port independence and real-time multi-tasking of MIDI applications."
Suggestion: How about a publisher-defined, bi-annually updated Minimum Compatibility Software Guarantee? For example, a manufacturer might state that their application is guaranteed to run on platforms X through Y, running system version X.X (including all Apple authored — and named — INITS). Is this an outrageous request? Some might say so, but any software company prepared to offer their customers this kind of guarantee would be demonstrating not only excellence in customer care, but confidence in their own product.
Opcode's bi-annual new product and update binge includes Claire, who for a sum of £149.95 acts as your personal ear trainer. Claire produces tones and scales that you can try to match pitch-wise by singing into your Mac's microphone. Claire then tells you how you fared, adjusting proceeding exercises to match your abilities Claire offers over 100 exercises based on the traditional solfege (singing) curriculum, and plug-in modules for specific instruments will follow. Mac owners without audio inputs can use external digitisers, such as Mac Recorder.
Of interest to educators is MusicShop (£149.95), a hipper version of EZ Vision, (Opcode's entry-level MIDI sequencer), offering notation editing and printing facility (EZ Vision is thus reduced to £99.95).
For the FE and HE sectors, Opcode have upgraded Max (their £399.95 object orientated MIDI programming language) to version 2.5, adding colour and custom menus plus support for QuickTime movies, Apple Events, and an 'snd' Object that can replay six sounds simultaneously through the Mac's internal speaker.
Opcode ditched their range of single-device MIDI librarians several years ago in favour of a universal librarian application called Galaxy Plus. However, the one-off librarian has surfaced again in the guise of Edit One (£TBA). In effect a disabled version of Galaxy Plus, the choice of target instrument is set in stone on installation.
Opcode intend to offer an upgrade from Edit One to Galaxy Plus and Galaxy Plus Editors (prices £TBA). Apropos of universal editors, 'Apple Notes' January '93 noted the similarity between Mark Of The Unicorn's UniSyn and Dr. T's X-oR. Your highly perceptive Mac correspondent has since discovered that this is largely, if not entirely, because UniSyn IS X-oR. The latter program is no more — MOTU bought it. (Opcode prices include VAT).
Feature by Kendall Wrightson
mu:zines is the result of thousands of hours of effort, and will require many thousands more going forward to reach our goals of getting all this content online.
If you value this resource, you can support this project - it really helps!