TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-02 > 1044914264


From: bob gillis <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] tmg gold 5.04 reports
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:00:00 -0500
References: <CHEMKKAJHOKJPIEOPLKDIEPMDEAA.clcasper@sprynet.com>


I don't know why Cheri took this exchange private. I will amend my
original statement about buggy to "Bob Velke has not fully released a
new version that has bugs in it to the best of his knowledge and to meet
a forecast release date".

How many users use embedded citations?

And why not put the IN on the tool bar for a quick preview?

And did Cheri and Teresa ask to be beta testers and were turned down?

bob gillis

Cheri Casper wrote me:
>
> Perhaps but that isn't going to happen. Bob is happy with the old guard.
> One of the absolutely beautiful things about GenBox is the embedded
> citations feature. You click on the coding in the memo text and it opens up
> the source so you can add your CD and see the output. Great. Also it has a
> "real live sentence preview complete with footnotes" and you don't have to
> generate a report to see it. CheriC
>
I wrote to Cheri:
>
> Ver 5 has not been fully released. And you and Teresa do things in TMG
> that I doubt the beta testers have even thought of. You two should be
> beta testers although in a way you are.
>
> Cheri Casper wrote:
>
> Bob - I have always heard people talk about BV not releasing a buggy
> product. Every version of TMG that I have used has bugs in it. Teresa
> has found about 6 or so in 5.0; I personally have found at least 4, > among them problems with using hidden codes in the MSL (this fixed in > > part with a patch, but it took 2 patches to completely resolve it); and > problems with embedded citations right off the top of my head.
>
> How can you say that it is not buggy, especially when they are still > bugs in even 4.0 after all this time? Or is it just a matter of > quantity that warrants the nomer "not buggy"?
>

This thread: