Red Gate, you have destroyed your reputation

• 
  Red Gate: GET F***ED - isnt that four words

  Flamingo February 03, 2011 08:20

  - 0 +
• 

  Flamingo wrote:

  Red Gate: GET F***ED - isnt that four words

  No, English grammatical standards dictate that his bi-worded sub-phrase began after the colon.

  JAssange February 03, 2011 14:57

  - 0 +
• 

  The_Assimilator wrote:

  Lutz Roeder, a one-man show, released a high-quality tool that he maintained for many years. As soon as he turned it over to your "awesome developers", quality took a dive, and now you have the gall to charge us money for this tool because it allegedly takes a lot to maintain? You REALLY expect anyone to believe this crap?

  
  Well, as I see it, 'quality' of the product did not take a dive at all --in fact, it increase in quality when Red-Gate took it over, for the simple reason that the .NET languages have changed in form.
  
  I can assure you that an older version of Lutz's Reflector would make more "garbledy-gook" out of the C# 3.0 language specification where the compiler used so much "syntactic sugar" it would make its teeth rot.
  
  I'm actually thankful that someone was able to take over the development of reflector so that one could make better sense of reading the code (though still not perfected) much better as the language itself generated new code.
  
  It does take a lot to maintain, sir, because the developers have to understand the nuances of the language, the compiled output and how to translate it back to something readable. In addition, they've been augmenting the product to integrate with Visual Studio and debugging which, by the way, has been quite helpful with 3rd party buggy components.
  
  I happen to appreciate their products.
  
  Cheers.

  JDelekto February 05, 2011 10:31

  - 0 +
• 

  JDelekto wrote:

  Well, as I see it, 'quality' of the product did not take a dive at all --in fact, it increase in quality when Red-Gate took it over, for the simple reason that the .NET languages have changed in form.
  
  I can assure you that an older version of Lutz's Reflector would make more "garbledy-gook" out of the C# 3.0 language specification where the compiler used so much "syntactic sugar" it would make its teeth rot.

  
  Upgrading to a new version to stay up to date with the new languages in .Net platform doesn't make it a good quality. That is why it is called an upgrade!
  

  JDelekto wrote:

  I'm actually thankful that someone was able to take over the development of reflector so that one could make better sense of reading the code (though still not perfected) much better as the language itself generated new code.

  
  Oh I was also thankful... until now. THEY BETTER MAKE THIS PERFECT! :evil: If not, it makes no difference at all than what it was before when it was free... still not perfect... but the thought of the .Net framework constantly upgrading... GOOD LUCK!
  

  JDelekto wrote:

  I happen to appreciate their products.

  
  I happen to appreciate it too... but not anymore. What I can see? Is a pitiful move to save the company revenues. They should fire their business executives.

  kenro February 08, 2011 08:26

  - 0 +
• 
  I'm terribly disappointed to see red gate make the decision to hold this software ransom. I understand they pay developers to maintain and add features. But to force anyone who wants to continue using old versions of the software to pay for it is equivalent to hold it ransom. Especially when they indicated it would continue to be free. I personally refuse to do business with any company using tactics like this and will advise my fortune 100 company to do the same. Goodbye red gate. I refuse to negotiate with software terrorists.

  DotNetDude February 08, 2011 11:34

  - 0 +

Add comment

Please sign in to leave a comment.