|
|
|
Forum Guru
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 5:13:28 PM
Posts: 240,
Visits: 635
|
|
I just spoke with PST staff, who said I should post this on the PST Forum, so here goes. As we have discovered, E-Prime 2.0 non-Professional is completely incompatible with Professional. That incompatibility seems to me a marketing decision to force customers to commit to one or the other, as I cannot think of any technical reason that the non-Pro version could not use programs created by Pro as long as they did not use any of the Pro enhancements, let alone why the Pro version could not use programs created by non-Pro. But she tells me that marketing does not tell development what to make, those decisions come from higher up in management.
So, does marketing really have no say over what happens in development? Why are non-Pro and Pro incompatible? Was that decided by marketing or management? Or is there really some technical reason that those two flavors could not have some degree of compatibility? And if so, could someone explain the reason?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum MVP
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:09:20 PM
Posts: 550,
Visits: 1,206
|
|
David, I appreciate the insight you have brought to the forum and encourage the continued postings which further reinforces the value of the forum where end users can share information including feature requests and dislikes of the system as well as in taste negative comments about the policies of Psychology Software Tools Inc. The development of the E-Prime system comes from a number of different avenues including all staff of PST, the research community, industrial partners, but most often by listening to the needs of our end users. For example, the E-Prime feature survey posted during E-Prime 2.0 development cycle asked end users over a hundred questions with a page to rate the top twenty on the final summary page. The Development of E-Prime focused on those areas that came directly from our end users. The comment from the PST staff member you spoke with was accurate in that the marketing departments do not make formal decisions in the development process, but their voices are heard loud and clear when end users request new features or their complaints about how to improve a process. Every request gets entered into our formal tracking system for review. You have summarized a number of other issues in regards to each edition of E-Prime 2.0 in the thread at http://support.pstnet.com/forum/Topic884-12-1.aspx which I’ve responded more verbosely there.
Thank you for your support of E-Prime 2.0 and please feel free to ask any additional questions as they will better help us serve the research community. -Brandon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brandon Cernicky
Senior Software Engineer
Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 1/11/2008 3:48:08 PM
Posts: 7,
Visits: 7
|
|
Not to sound overly critical, but...
I'd just like to echo that I think it's in very poor taste for PST to encode the .ebs source files. To my eye, it looks like these are simple XML text files that have been encoded purely to limit user access to the files. In my week or so of using the RC, this is the first substantive change I've noticed between 1.X and 2.0--so that's disappointing.
It also seems short-sighted in that user restrictions like these tend to encourage the development of open/free competition.
|
|
|
|
