And why you insist on using a version that even Adobe has pulled instead of winding back only gives us the impression you're a masochist among other things.
hmm, i thought it was pretty clear that he said this was found in 1.4 and not in 1.3.1,which he is using now...so not sure why you keep insisting that he is using 1.4?
hmm, i thought it was pretty clear that he said this was found in 1.4 and not in 1.3.1,which he is using now...so not sure why you keep insisting that he is using 1.4?
Moot point, the bug doesn't show up for me under 1.4 (or 1.3), this is just a major bitching session. Lets move on.
Moot point, the bug doesn't show up for me under 1.4 (or 1.3), this is just a major bitching session. Lets move on.
Wow, you should go work for Adobe QA. If it works on your system (which is also probably a Mac when I'm using a PC), then it can't possibly be an Adobe bug. And, it's my responsibility to find other users with the same problem to prove that it's a bug. Boy, remind me never to buy anything from you. You have unbelievable customer service skills.
Moot point, the bug doesn't show up for me under 1.4 (or 1.3), this is just a major bitching session. Lets move on.
I'm genuinely curious: why is it a "moot point" if the bug doesn't show up for you, but does show up for John? I would think that it would be a useful data point for somebody.
At any rate, I'm glad rolling back Lightroom solved his problem.
I'm genuinely curious: why is it a "moot point" if the bug doesn't show up for you, but does show up for John? I would think that it would be a useful data point for somebody.
So you and Jfriend are saying this is absolutely an Adobe bug, you've traced it to most others (or all other) users of the same build and system? Or this is some isolated incidence? Point me to forums where other users have reported this exact issue in mass. Until then, the likelihood is its not a bug but a user issue. Of course, we can have an application quit (even repeatedly), go on a rant about Adobe's poor software and Q&E before we even see that our own house is in order. It makes one feel better, doesn't solve the issue nor track down what's exactly going on. The entire post here is a huge bandwidth waste but worse, it's negatively directed at Adobe when so far, not an ounce of proof has surfaced that its NOT a user issue. Like I said, when you point me to reports of identical crashes from multiple users, I'll be more inclined to believe its a bug in LR itself.
So you and Jfriend are saying this is absolutely an Adobe bug, you've traced it to most others (or all other) users of the same build and system? Or this is some isolated incidence? Point me to forums where other users have reported this exact issue in mass. Until then, the likelihood is its not a bug but a user issue. Of course, we can have an application quit (even repeatedly), go on a rant about Adobe's poor software and Q&E before we even see that our own house is in order. It makes one feel better, doesn't solve the issue nor track down what's exactly going on. The entire post here is a huge bandwidth waste but worse, it's negatively directed at Adobe when so far, not an ounce of proof has surfaced that its NOT a user issue. Like I said, when you point me to reports of identical crashes from multiple users, I'll be more inclined to believe its a bug in LR itself.
I have to say, I find this post rather astonishing. Even the most arrogant software vendor has never demanded that a user prove "his own house is in order" before reporting a bug.
I have to say, I find this post rather astonishing. Even the most arrogant software vendor has never demanded that a user prove "his own house is in order" before reporting a bug.
You must not have a lot of experience beta testing software. I've been beta testing Photoshop since version 2.5, and the list of other products is pretty extensive.
Applications crash, its not automatically attributed to a software bug in the current application. When you get a few people with similar systems, all crashing based on the same behavior, you've got a good indication its a software bug.
We have one person bitching about Adobe and their buggy software crashing his machine, no one else here (or anywhere someone has yet pointed to me) has reported this. So we have one user's machine crashing and thousands of others that can't replicate this. What's the odds its NOT the users machine and is a bug?
So you and Jfriend are saying this is absolutely an Adobe bug, you've traced it to most others (or all other) users of the same build and system? Or this is some isolated incidence? Point me to forums where other users have reported this exact issue in mass. Until then, the likelihood is its not a bug but a user issue. Of course, we can have an application quit (even repeatedly), go on a rant about Adobe's poor software and Q&E before we even see that our own house is in order. It makes one feel better, doesn't solve the issue nor track down what's exactly going on. The entire post here is a huge bandwidth waste but worse, it's negatively directed at Adobe when so far, not an ounce of proof has surfaced that its NOT a user issue. Like I said, when you point me to reports of identical crashes from multiple users, I'll be more inclined to believe its a bug in LR itself.
No, I'm saying that it is worth investigating, regardless of the initially hostile tone of the post.
Why do you assume that Jfriend's house is "out of order"?
Jfriend provided information about his system, and what steps he did to replicate the crash. And if he's being especially critical of Adobe, then you are taking the opposite tack: if it crashed and isn't replicated elsewhere, it MUST be his hardware or operating system.
I work for a municipality in IT/Technical Infrastructure. When a major application crashes, even if it never has before, our beginning assumption is that it is a problem with the application, until or unless we have strong evidence that it is something else. And yes, we file many unique-to-us bug reports with our vendors, and yes, we expect resolution on those cases.
No, I'm saying that it is worth investigating, regardless of the initially hostile tone of the post.
Why do you assume that Jfriend's house is "out of order"?
Could be any number of system issues. If its not a bug we can find elsewhere, even with infrequent users of the same or similar system, what else is it? Bad Ram, a corrupted file or database?
Intermittent bugs are the hardest to track down. But at least we see them from time to time on various systems. Here we have an issue that apparently crashes LR each time, fine. Now is this automatically a bug in the current software? Has this been identified on other systems from other users or, due to the fact that from the frustration of having the application quit, someone should go onto a public forum and state:
Is this program just unstable and full of bugs? Is Adobe this bad now? They're on release 1.4 already. One would think they would have fixed these kinds of obvious bugs that I hit when processing my first serious shoot.
Software and the companies that work hard to build the software should be innocent until proven guilty. So far, the few posters here haven't been able to crash LR using the same steps described. And no one yet has pointed out other users who are having such issues which would have been a good cool before sending out the dogs publicly on Adobe.
So far, the few posters here haven't been able to crash LR using the same steps described.
I don't think anyone here is running v1.4, which is the only version John said it was happening in.
I love LR myself, and have had no crashes (mac), but I'm not running the recalled release. It would be very silly for anyone to run the recalled release just to prove to You that the crashes John had were/weren't his own fault.
I don't think anyone here is running v1.4, which is the only version John said it was happening in.
I love LR myself, and have had no crashes (mac), but I'm not running the recalled release. It would be very silly for anyone to run the recalled release just to prove to You that the crashes John had were/weren't his own fault.
I'm actually now running 1.4.1 but ran 1.4 for a long time before the rest of you, and 1.3 and all kinds of builds in between, I didn't crash the application based on anything like John described. But the point here isn't which build would or would not crash, the point is, until you KNOW for a fact that you've got a bug, one you can repeat on other hardware of similar type (and OS), its inflammatory to go on a rant about how bad Adobe software is, or how buggy it is until you are damn sure its a software bug and not something else. I understand John's frustration. Until he's 100% sure its a bug in that product, best not to go flaming the company. I suspect he's far from 100% sure this was a real LR bug as am I. I'm happy to be proven wrong, even then, I don't see the need to go bashing the company as was done here. Its not like they went out of their way to crash John's machine! That no one else can produce the same issues, its real premature to go to a forum and act as if there's no question is a bug in the product, especially when others have stated they can't replicate the issue. End of story.
Software and the companies that work hard to build the software should be innocent until proven guilty.
This is the root of our disagreement.
I work in the software industry and I say that the customer should be assumed to be right until proven otherwise, not the other way around.
We don't tell our customers that because the problem doesn't happen on our computers, it must not be a bug. We never tell our customers that until they find other people with the same problem, we won't consider it something worth listening to and investigating.
In fact, we do find problems in our software that are "environmental" in nature which means they are caused by unexpected configurations or unexpected behaviors. While these are a pain in the arse for our own testing process and they significantly slow our development down, we take responsibility for making our software deal with these environmental differences over time so that our software can "just work" for our customers regardless of these environmental differences. We call it "hardening". Some of this process should be designed in from the beginning. Some has to be put in later when you discover environmental issues that you had no idea would be there or would matter.
What you have described is exactly the opposite. I sure hope Adobe as a company doesn't really believe that.
I work in the software industry and I say that the customer should be assumed to be right until proven otherwise, not the other way around.
We don't tell our customers that because the problem doesn't happen on our computers, it must not be a bug. We never tell our customers that until they find other people with the same problem, we won't consider it something worth listening to and investigating.
Same situation here. I have MANY times where I have to spend a lot of time tracking something down because one person said it was a bug in the system/app. A lot of times I find that it was a setting on thier system, but a lot of other times it is just a combination of something coded in the app reacting with the way thier system is set up (like diet coke and mentos, haha).
What I'm trying to say is that I agree with you on that last post, John.
Same situation here. I have MANY times where I have to spend a lot of time tracking something down because one person said it was a bug in the system/app. A lot of times I find that it was a setting on thier system, but a lot of other times it is just a combination of something coded in the app reacting with the way thier system is set up (like diet coke and mentos, haha).
What I'm trying to say is that I agree with you on that last post, John.
Like all the people that were saying the most recent OS X 10.5.2 security update broke ssh and printing, only to find out that it was Rogue Amoeba's software (Audio Hijack and Airfoil) that loaded a kernel module which relied on code being laid out in a certain order (which is a big fat bug)?
I don't think anyone here is running v1.4, which is the only version John said it was happening in.
I love LR myself, and have had no crashes (mac), but I'm not running the recalled release. It would be very silly for anyone to run the recalled release just to prove to You that the crashes John had were/weren't his own fault.
1.4 is withdrawn, with a recommend to revert to 1.3
1.4 is withdrawn, with a recommend to revert to 1.3
That would be 1.3.1 because of the fixes 1.3 needed.
And , yes, best not to be running 1.4, epecially on a PC, with some caution on a Mac, though still not recomended!
Don
Don Ricklin - Gear: Canon EOS 5D Mark III, was Pentax K7
'I was older then, I'm younger than that now' ....
My Blog | Q+ | Moderator, Lightroom Forums | My Amateur Smugmug Stuff | My Blurb book Rust and Whimsy. More Rust , FaceBook.
Interestingly, the debate about Adobe issue or end user issue, is somewhat similar to my customers telling me that my website doesn't work because they can't purchase a photo.
It could be a smugmug issue, but usually a consumer issue. But I did have a customer try to purchase a photo last sunday during the smugmug "outage" when they probably were in read-only so this explained it.
Or it could be they are using a unsupported browser.
Assuming one way or the other can make a, well you know.
I think a few people made some assumptions.
Anyway I love lightroom!!!!
"A photo is like a hamburger. You can get one from McDonalds for $1, one from Chili's for $5, or one from Ruth's Chris for $15. You usually get what you pay for, but don't expect a Ruth's Chris burger at a McDonalds price, if you want that, go cook it yourself." - me
Comments
hmm, i thought it was pretty clear that he said this was found in 1.4 and not in 1.3.1,which he is using now...so not sure why you keep insisting that he is using 1.4?
Moot point, the bug doesn't show up for me under 1.4 (or 1.3), this is just a major bitching session. Lets move on.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Wow, you should go work for Adobe QA. If it works on your system (which is also probably a Mac when I'm using a PC), then it can't possibly be an Adobe bug. And, it's my responsibility to find other users with the same problem to prove that it's a bug. Boy, remind me never to buy anything from you. You have unbelievable customer service skills.
I'm done discussing this with you too.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
I'm genuinely curious: why is it a "moot point" if the bug doesn't show up for you, but does show up for John? I would think that it would be a useful data point for somebody.
At any rate, I'm glad rolling back Lightroom solved his problem.
So you and Jfriend are saying this is absolutely an Adobe bug, you've traced it to most others (or all other) users of the same build and system? Or this is some isolated incidence? Point me to forums where other users have reported this exact issue in mass. Until then, the likelihood is its not a bug but a user issue. Of course, we can have an application quit (even repeatedly), go on a rant about Adobe's poor software and Q&E before we even see that our own house is in order. It makes one feel better, doesn't solve the issue nor track down what's exactly going on. The entire post here is a huge bandwidth waste but worse, it's negatively directed at Adobe when so far, not an ounce of proof has surfaced that its NOT a user issue. Like I said, when you point me to reports of identical crashes from multiple users, I'll be more inclined to believe its a bug in LR itself.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
I have to say, I find this post rather astonishing. Even the most arrogant software vendor has never demanded that a user prove "his own house is in order" before reporting a bug.
You must not have a lot of experience beta testing software. I've been beta testing Photoshop since version 2.5, and the list of other products is pretty extensive.
Applications crash, its not automatically attributed to a software bug in the current application. When you get a few people with similar systems, all crashing based on the same behavior, you've got a good indication its a software bug.
We have one person bitching about Adobe and their buggy software crashing his machine, no one else here (or anywhere someone has yet pointed to me) has reported this. So we have one user's machine crashing and thousands of others that can't replicate this. What's the odds its NOT the users machine and is a bug?
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
No, I'm saying that it is worth investigating, regardless of the initially hostile tone of the post.
Why do you assume that Jfriend's house is "out of order"?
Jfriend provided information about his system, and what steps he did to replicate the crash. And if he's being especially critical of Adobe, then you are taking the opposite tack: if it crashed and isn't replicated elsewhere, it MUST be his hardware or operating system.
I work for a municipality in IT/Technical Infrastructure. When a major application crashes, even if it never has before, our beginning assumption is that it is a problem with the application, until or unless we have strong evidence that it is something else. And yes, we file many unique-to-us bug reports with our vendors, and yes, we expect resolution on those cases.
And that's all I have to say on this subject.
Excellent advise
www.ivarborst.nl & smugmug
Could be any number of system issues. If its not a bug we can find elsewhere, even with infrequent users of the same or similar system, what else is it? Bad Ram, a corrupted file or database?
Intermittent bugs are the hardest to track down. But at least we see them from time to time on various systems. Here we have an issue that apparently crashes LR each time, fine. Now is this automatically a bug in the current software? Has this been identified on other systems from other users or, due to the fact that from the frustration of having the application quit, someone should go onto a public forum and state:
Software and the companies that work hard to build the software should be innocent until proven guilty. So far, the few posters here haven't been able to crash LR using the same steps described. And no one yet has pointed out other users who are having such issues which would have been a good cool before sending out the dogs publicly on Adobe.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
I don't think anyone here is running v1.4, which is the only version John said it was happening in.
I love LR myself, and have had no crashes (mac), but I'm not running the recalled release. It would be very silly for anyone to run the recalled release just to prove to You that the crashes John had were/weren't his own fault.
I'm actually now running 1.4.1 but ran 1.4 for a long time before the rest of you, and 1.3 and all kinds of builds in between, I didn't crash the application based on anything like John described. But the point here isn't which build would or would not crash, the point is, until you KNOW for a fact that you've got a bug, one you can repeat on other hardware of similar type (and OS), its inflammatory to go on a rant about how bad Adobe software is, or how buggy it is until you are damn sure its a software bug and not something else. I understand John's frustration. Until he's 100% sure its a bug in that product, best not to go flaming the company. I suspect he's far from 100% sure this was a real LR bug as am I. I'm happy to be proven wrong, even then, I don't see the need to go bashing the company as was done here. Its not like they went out of their way to crash John's machine! That no one else can produce the same issues, its real premature to go to a forum and act as if there's no question is a bug in the product, especially when others have stated they can't replicate the issue. End of story.
Author "Color Management for Photographers"
http://www.digitaldog.net/
This is the root of our disagreement.
I work in the software industry and I say that the customer should be assumed to be right until proven otherwise, not the other way around.
We don't tell our customers that because the problem doesn't happen on our computers, it must not be a bug. We never tell our customers that until they find other people with the same problem, we won't consider it something worth listening to and investigating.
In fact, we do find problems in our software that are "environmental" in nature which means they are caused by unexpected configurations or unexpected behaviors. While these are a pain in the arse for our own testing process and they significantly slow our development down, we take responsibility for making our software deal with these environmental differences over time so that our software can "just work" for our customers regardless of these environmental differences. We call it "hardening". Some of this process should be designed in from the beginning. Some has to be put in later when you discover environmental issues that you had no idea would be there or would matter.
What you have described is exactly the opposite. I sure hope Adobe as a company doesn't really believe that.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Same situation here. I have MANY times where I have to spend a lot of time tracking something down because one person said it was a bug in the system/app. A lot of times I find that it was a setting on thier system, but a lot of other times it is just a combination of something coded in the app reacting with the way thier system is set up (like diet coke and mentos, haha).
What I'm trying to say is that I agree with you on that last post, John.
Like all the people that were saying the most recent OS X 10.5.2 security update broke ssh and printing, only to find out that it was Rogue Amoeba's software (Audio Hijack and Airfoil) that loaded a kernel module which relied on code being laid out in a certain order (which is a big fat bug)?
1.4 is withdrawn, with a recommend to revert to 1.3
And , yes, best not to be running 1.4, epecially on a PC, with some caution on a Mac, though still not recomended!
Don
'I was older then, I'm younger than that now' ....
My Blog | Q+ | Moderator, Lightroom Forums | My Amateur Smugmug Stuff | My Blurb book Rust and Whimsy. More Rust , FaceBook .
It could be a smugmug issue, but usually a consumer issue. But I did have a customer try to purchase a photo last sunday during the smugmug "outage" when they probably were in read-only so this explained it.
Or it could be they are using a unsupported browser.
Assuming one way or the other can make a, well you know.
I think a few people made some assumptions.
Anyway I love lightroom!!!!