On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Chris O'Connor chriso1515@gmail.com wrote:
I bought TM under the impression that it was being actively developed, due in no small part to the notice that TM2 would require leopard at a minimum. Allan may not "owe" anyone anything, but that notice certainly implied that TM2 was already well underway, and was expected well before now. Also, you can't blame folks getting curious when the blog has been *so* silent for many months, yet again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caveat_emptor
Thanks
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:46 PM, John Vilsack john.vilsack@activesportsinc.com wrote:
I love conversations like this. People that hope to curry favor rush to the defense of the oppressed business owner, yelling "LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!" while others indignantly proclaim that purchasing a piece of software somehow entitles you to some sort of protracted support contract that the developer is in grave violation of.
We all entered into the same legally binding agreement that provided us with a version of software that would work (at the time) with the system listed in the requirements. Other than that, we are owed nothing.
If Lion comes out tomorrow and Textmate doesn't work, we are SOL. If Textmate doesn't meet your requirements for transparency and release cycles, by all means exercises your rights of free market capitalism and select a competitor. The market is full of them these days.
But if you bought Textmate solely based on the fact that Textmate 2 "might" be out there, then you are an idiot. They even gave you 30 days to be sure.
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate
-- Chris O'Connor 347.563.2136 chriso1515@gmail.com http://www.choipaint.com/
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate