Joined: Jun 11, 2006 Posts: 481 Location: Great Britain
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:29 pm Post subject: Somewhat - but not entirely - OT
I just saw the listing for NeoOffice 3.0.2 on Apple Downloads and I was reminded of the discussions in this topic when I read: "Fast, free, and friendly support for all users." Isn't this giving potential (non-donating) users false expectations of the support level? Edit: I just noticed the page is titled 3.0.1 whereas Apple's RSS feed labels it as 3.0.2 - don't know if that's Apple's snafu or yours.
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:42 pm Post subject: Re: Somewhat - but not entirely - OT
djpimley wrote:
I just saw the listing for NeoOffice 3.0.2 on Apple Downloads and I was reminded of the discussions in this topic when I read: "Fast, free, and friendly support for all users." Isn't this giving potential (non-donating) users false expectations of the support level? Edit: I just noticed the page is titled 3.0.1 whereas Apple's RSS feed labels it as 3.0.2 - don't know if that's Apple's snafu or yours.
I don't know if Smokey or someone else updates that site.
As a general, neither Ed, I, or Fran ever post NeoOffice news, product profiles, or comments on any site other than our own so it is not uncommon for third-party sites to post stale or incorrect data.
Joined: Jun 11, 2006 Posts: 481 Location: Great Britain
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:53 pm Post subject:
I don't think Apple ever do syndication to their downloads site, so someone with an Apple developer account must be administering the NeoOffice product listing. I've had a few listings on the download site and I know the update process is a simple self-submitted form. Changes should be easy to submit - then the changes go for a quick spin in the Apple black box and 48 hours later an updated listing is spewed out, if the Gods are willing.
I used to submit new-major-version updates there, yes. However, the last time I tried to submit an update there, the process had changed and it didn't work (it was a couple of Neos ago).*
I'll have a look again and see if I can access that listing now and update it.
Smokey
* In general, update sites have become more and more restrictive about letting software authors submit/update their own listings. Both VersionTracker and MacUpdate now require you to let them host a copy of your binary and to agree to a bunch of legalese in order for you to be able to update your own listing (and they monitor www.neooffice.org/neojava for any web page changes, which cause them to automatically create a new release in their databases, regardless of what we try to have them do or not do). It's very unpleasant these days. _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
OK, the ADC submission seemed to be working this time, and I pushed an update that uses the latest version of the www.neooffice.org boilerplate text.
Hopefully it should appear in a day or so.
(Just to be clear, Apple *has* been updating that listing *on their own* for some time now, ever since I tried to update it and the system had changed--or was temporarily broken, or whatever--a few major releases ago.)
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
* In general, update sites have become more and more restrictive about letting software authors submit/update their own listings. Both VersionTracker and MacUpdate now require you to let them host a copy of your binary and to agree to a bunch of legalese in order for you to be able to update your own listing (and they monitor www.neooffice.org/neojava for any web page changes, which cause them to automatically create a new release in their databases, regardless of what we try to have them do or not do). It's very unpleasant these days.
I suspect that sites like VersionTracker and MacUpdate are getting more difficult to deal with is that they are all trying to force software developers to do move their announcements and support activities to their ad-based sites. In other words, everyone seems to want to be an "app store".
I don't have a very high opinion on sites like VersionTracker and MacUpdate as their business model is intrinsically at odds with ours. They apparently want to funnel all of downloads and support requests through their site so that they make ad revenue.
In contrast, I have no issue with the Apple download page model as they are merely providing a description and a link to the software developer's site. There is still the problem with their description becoming inaccurate over time, but I guess I have accepted that is the nature of the internet: sites other than the primary site may be out of date.
I suspect that sites like VersionTracker and MacUpdate are getting more difficult to deal with is that they are all trying to force software developers to do move their announcements and support activities to their ad-based sites. In other words, everyone seems to want to be an "app store".
You're right, because there was a period of time in the middle where we had pounded VT and MU into submission, and then later, coincidentally about the time the App Store appeared, the sites suddenly became impossible to deal with again.
Smokey _________________ "[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
