[AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy

Mark A Matte markamatte at hotmail.com
Tue Jan 25 13:01:54 CST 2005


In 2002 I traded in a 2001 truck for a 98 Jeep Cherokee Classic.  It runs, 
is functional, I can run over stuff, and I just like it...I guess I take the 
same approach with Access.  There might actually be a correlation between 
our program approaches and the vehicles we drive...either way I'm glad the 
list is here.  Many thanks to everyone for the help and camaraderie over the 
last 6 years (has it really been that long?).

Thanks,

Mark A. Matte


>From: DWUTKA at marlow.com
>Reply-To: Access Developers discussion and problem 
>solving<accessd at databaseadvisors.com>
>To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 11:27:01 -0600
>
>88 Silverado with the paint peeling on the hood.  I'm a redneck programmer.
>
>If your screen saver has a scope tracking a deer....you might be a red neck
>programmer.
>
>If you write Class Objects with properties such as 'Didjaeatyet'....you
>might be a red neck programmer.
>
>If you use bound forms .....
>
>Just kidding.  I know it's Tuesday, but I've had an extended long
>week....just playing around during one of the raw breathers I've been able
>to take!
>
>Drew
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nicholson, Karen [mailto:cyx5 at cdc.gov]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 5:26 AM
>To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>An escort?  I thought all of us rich programmers had Hummers and
>Beemers.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of John W. Colby
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:20 PM
>To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>It is only your problem if you claimed it was possible.  I tried to
>drive my
>Escort to the moon.  It is definitely NOT Ford's fault I failed to get
>there.
>
>At some point you have to say "look, that doesn't work - and I never
>claimed
>it did."
>
>John W. Colby
>www.ColbyConsulting.com
>
>Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause:
>http://folding.stanford.edu/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Charlotte
>Foust
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 3:05 PM
>To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>Concurrent connections isn't *necessarily* the problem.  We have a
>client
>who insists on trying to run our app over a WAN where it can take an
>hour to
>load a report!  That isn't a concurrency problem in our app, it's a
>bandwidth problem in their WAN.  It's still "our" problem.
>
>Charlotte Foust
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John W. Colby [mailto:jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com]
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 10:45 AM
>To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>Concurrent connections is not the problem.  I have a database running
>just
>fine with about 45 connections (bound forms no less).
>
>John W. Colby
>www.ColbyConsulting.com
>
>Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause:
>http://folding.stanford.edu/
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Nicholson,
>Karen
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 1:26 PM
>To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>Yeah, but the guy paid over $10,000 for the system.  He wants that back.
>What can you do when Microsoft claims that Access can handle 255
>concurrent
>database connections at one time?  We all know that is just bird-poopey.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Brett
>Barabash
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 1:13 PM
>To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
>Subject: RE: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>
>Karen,
>First of all, if the total loss is $3000, this is clearly a small claims
>court issue.  A civil court won't hear a case under $5K, and it wouldn't
>be
>worth it for the client to pay a lawyer to recover such a small amount.
>Of
>course, explaining dumbing down the evidence for a small claims court is
>no
>small task.
>
>Secondly, there is the legal concept of mitigation of loss.  The client
>will
>be burdened with the task of proving that they didn't know about the bug
>six
>months ago.  If it can be proven that they did know about it and said
>nothing, the actual amount of damage will be greatly reduced.
>
>And finally, if this can be proven to be a Microsoft technology issue
>(security flaw, data corruption bug, etc.), and it is documented
>(knowledgebase, 3rd party journals, etc.), it should be easy for the
>developer to prove that they were not at fault.  I have gone down this
>exact
>road with a MS solution provider for way more than $3000.  After we
>reviewed
>the facts, it was clear to us that the problem was with the product, not
>the
>consultant.  So sue Bill instead (oh, and good luck with all that!).
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Nicholson,
>Karen
>Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 11:13 AM
>To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
>Subject: [AccessD] Time for More Legal Discussion - Oh Boy
>
>What happens when a program is written for a customer using Microsoft
>Technology, and the Microsoft Technology is bad - its data, its logic.
>It
>has cost this one client, he claims, $3000 in lost revenue and he wants
>the
>payment for the system refunded plus damages.  The user never notified
>said
>programmer that there was a problem even though they have been using it
>for
>a good six months.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--------------------------------------------
>The information in this email may contain confidential information that
>is legally privileged. The inform
>
>recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you
>are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the
>taking
>of any action in regard to the content of this email is strictly
>prohibited.
>If
>transmission is incorrect, unclear, or incomplete, please notify the
>sender
>immediately. The authorized recipient(s) of this information is/are
>prohibited
>from disclosing this information to any other party and is/are required
>to
>destroy the information after its stated need has been fulfilled.
>
>Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
>except where the sender specifies and with authority, states them to be
>the
>views of Tappe Construction Co.
>
>This footer also confirms that this email message has been scanned for
>the
>presence of computer viruses.Scanning of this message and addition of
>this
>footer is performed by SurfControl E-mail Filter software in conjunction
>with virus detection software.
>
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
>
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
>
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com





More information about the AccessD mailing list