Just shows even the best manufacturers have problems that require bug fixing. you can google anything crashing if you like:
mac crashing Do you get my point though? They are obligated to sort out bugs; upgrades are not obligatory.
TWD
I just thought of another illustration whilst sitting on my throne
You said you have been working with computer programs for years...you might understand this.
Lets say you were software designer in a specialist field and are contracted to design a piece of software for a specific application. You negotiate a fixed sum.
You worked at it for months, running different scenarios and found it to be ok. However once deployed and working in the real world the company found your software would crash in certain situations or behave in ways you had not anticipated.
You might be obliged under contract to sort those errors out without charge, and if you were not obliged in your contract you may choose to do so to keep your reputation.
Whilst your working on the bugs you realise the company are using your software in ways you had not expected and that it would be much easier if they had a revised GUI, with more visable on screen controls to monitor events. At the same time they say it would be nice if they had ths or that function. So you decide to add a few other features in there to help make life easier for them.
The company have already paid you well for your work so you might decide to add the upgraded features free of charge along with your Bug fixes.
Or...you could just install the bug fixes and try and sell them the updates at a later date.
Which would your customer appreciate most do you think?
TWD
[This message has been edited by Tonewheeldude (edited 02-14-2010).]