[QUOTE=jsmiddleton4;1943076]I’ll give you a threereal world examples, small software company, in fact open source to big software company.
BitPM. It is an application for managing cell phones.
There are two versions. The stable version. The beta version. You want to play with new features, variables, etc., you play with the beta version. You want stable, you use the stable version.
DD-WRT firmware for several wireless routers. Stable version, beta versions, release candidate versions. You want stable, you use the stable version. You want to play, you use beta or release candidate versions.
There are many other examples with Microsoft. Current release candidates for SP3 XP as an example. And yes, I used dreaded Microsoft as an example.
When a software package has a version in which features work, like mobile conversion, and then release a new version in which those previously working features now exhibit problems of prior releases, like A/V out-of-synch, that is evidence of a problematic process. No one is talking about intentions. I’m sure everyone intends for the software to be stable on each release.
There is no excuse for the reintroduction of problems that have been fixed already.
Will there be problems with new features, issues that need to be tweaked as the software grows? Absolutely. I expect and accept that to be the nature of the beast. Am glad and amazed at the progress of this software and its capabilities. Am more than happy to try some of those new features out and discover bugs.
That is not what I am talking about.
When in the development process old bugs are reintroduced, that is a “process” problem and needs to be addressed and corrected. I’m sorry but I am not going to budge from the opinion that the reintroduction of old squashed bugs is problematic. It doesn’t matter how big or small a company is nor the intentions of software engineers.
And just to make sure we stay in context here, I appreciate DVDFab, use it, will continue to use it, support it, am not going anywhere in regards to some other software. I am amazed at the attention it is paid by its authors and its growing features.
They just need to nail down a version so it is stable, all features work as expected and set aside resources on keeping that version up to date on copy protection schemes.
Then have a development version that will certainly introduce all kinds of variables and issues that people can play with as they choose to. Once that version is stable, release it as the new version.
Right now the two software goals are getting mixed together. Updating copy protection and introducing new features mixed in each update. TOO many variables at once introducing unnecessary “issues” some of them old issues.
I don’t think that under appreciates the work being done nor the product nor is it unreasonable in any way. And it is not unusual out there in the software world either. Quite common in fact.
Whether that will happen or not is not up to me of course.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your post,then why is since fab first came out they could never get movie with menus right, clone dvd2 does it correctly 99.9% of the time, i like fab but it does some ware things in custom mode i copy boat trip menus check and remove annoying pgc box check, rip and burn no play on home dvd so i took same copy reripped in clone dvd2 movies only burned it and it played fine, second problem i rip and burned in full mode tv series and checked the box jump to first menu when disc inserted after burn it stated to play on third esopied, so my question is which box needs to be check so it brings me right to menu like any dvd does,its a simple question and if fab can’t do it right then allow us to use any dvd while using fab program.