Bug, bugs and bugs only! Not a software product!

Question

I wonder how self-confident man has to be to gain so much impudence enough to release that kind of buggy crap. I have never met legal and so-called "stable" software like this and do really hope never to have to get in contact with again.
I've spent 4 damn days on a project which i first built in one (!!!) hour and which should be done so, the rest of time i spent on working around the software bugs like not being able to really import prepared mpeg2-files, constant crashing and falling in the final build process giving you something like 'Blu-ray Error: "fatal error", Code: "6", Note: "'. And what, customer has to guess what he has to do next?!!
Adobe completely loses its image gained with legendary products like Photoshop, Illustrator or After Effects, releasing that unstable software.

Answer 1

Chris,
Thanks for setting Neil & Jeff straight. I read your posts and fully providing a solution and was able to effectuate a repair.
Now, while I sit rendering another long project, let me just share some light in this conversation. As a previous owner of major software company with over 1000 employers, I have had to address issues of Buggy software over and over. For all of you whom are sittin in the "cheap seats", let me explain the structure of how these companies work.
Engineers design the system, programmers write the code, Quality Assurance TEST the code. It is the job of the QA department to RIG the system to FAIL! YES folks, that's right, FAIL! They set up all of the different scenerios to see if they can get the software to fail, hooking up the wrong equipment, wrong files, etc. If the programmers did a thorough job, then the software would catch these errors, inform the user of a problem, log the problem, and send a report (by paper in the old days), back to the QA department who would then implement a bug report to the programming staff.
A system which does not catch these errors but simply hangs, stops, crashes, giving no explanation is BUGGY. That is the failure of the QA department. The more bugs, the worse the performance of the QA department. If the QA department had done a thorough job, there is NO WAY that Encore 1.5, 2.0 & 3.0 would have been released with all of the bugs that came with the initial release. Remember, upgrades to an existing product level has two purposes. 1) To provide additional capabilities, 2) To repair BUGS!
Now a word to the users of this forum. In my teaching years, my number one instruction to my engineering students was to "SOLVE THE PROBLEM"! I would tell them that no one cares to hear how smart you are, SHOW us how smart you are and SOLVE THE PROBLEM!
For those of you who point to numerous reason as to the possible cause, spelling & grammatical mistakes, I would have FLUNKED you out of my class because you did not follow the instructions and perform the objective which is to SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
To point out WHERE a solution to a problem may have been found AFTER it has already been repair is not SOLVING the problem! You would have flunked the course.
After spending days working on a problem AND spending hours on the phone with technical support and still not having a problem fixed is
not acceptable. This is the difference between successful products and non-successful products.
Therefore, what I am requesting in the future is this; if the participants in this forum would keep their eye on the ball and concentrate on the problems at hand and solutions for its repairs, then this forum will be much more successful.
If you want to discuss Spelling, Grammer, Microsoft operating systems, etc, then I sugguest that you start your own BLOG, when you can state your opinion till the end of time and hope that someone will join in.
However, for myself and most likely Chris, we're just looking for a solution to our problems.
Chris, I thank you for your continued posts. The installation program should have realized the different between the Administrator & User AND if installation on the user presented a problem, then the program should have accounted for that issue. THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF A BUG! For the QA department NOT to pick up on this simple problem would be a major disgrace & failure on their part.
As I stated earlier, there seems to be a problem with the installation program. We were able to isolate a problem with a 4 TB disk array. For some reason, the installation program is placing a thread onto the array. If the array has a failure (utilizing Raid 5), the program (CS3 in general) thinks that the program has been re-installed and needs to be re-activiated. No one at Adobe can figure this one out since the program is not suppose to put threads on the array (it is a data array only). While I'm not sure if this is different problem (you are using a network), it may tend to create the same type of scenerio that you are encountering.
Our solution was to delete the preferences file (as I informed you in my previous post) and wait until the next array failure (which may never happen) to see what happens.
If I can be of further help, let me know. I'll post my findings of our current problems once Level II Tech Support gets back with me tomorrow.