Jump to content

bernarddesgagne

Members
  • Content count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About bernarddesgagne

  • Rank
    Occasional Forum Poster
  1. bernarddesgagne

    Retrospect 6 French?

    If it is that complex for Dantz, its engineers need to take a course in software localization. Your application is most certainly not properly internationalized. When the programming is done right, all localizable elements are in resource files (XML) and everybody around the world should get exactly the same bugs. No message, no interface element should be hard coded. The language of the interface should have no impact on the performance of the application. No testing should be required other than to verify the accuracy of the translation. Actually, many software developers on Mac OS X provide with their applications the resource files for all the languages they publish them in. The installer just reads the user's language preference files and chooses the proper resource file. Mac OS X is made for easy localization. Maybe Dantz is lost in the dark confines of the Windoze world and cannot see the obvious proper way of doing things. According to Dantz's own Web site, this company "is one of Soft•letter's 100 largest personal computer software companies and was included on the "Inc. 500", Inc. Magazine's list of fastest growing companies." Millions of computers around the world are backed up with Dantz's products, which makes it, in my view, a wealthy multinational capable of producing localized versions of its products much quicker than it is doing now. Especially given the price its customers have to pay to upgrade the product each time they upgrade to a new version of their operating system. I am one of these customers, and I am starting to be fed up with Dantz's policy toward its foreign language customers.
  2. bernarddesgagne

    Retrospect 6 French?

    What is taking so long? Some software developers can publish software in different languages in very short delays. Apple is a good example. Why is Dantz taking three months to translate a few character strings? It is not as if you had to start from scratch. Unless you deeply change the interface, which is most certainly not the case with Retrospect 6.0. And even then, the terminology will remain the same. What is the reason for such long delays? Can't Dantz reduce them, as well as costs, by sticking to electronic documents. Obviously, printing a 300 page manual in different languages is costly, but putting it online is fast and efficient. The cost of the translation itself is minimal. For example, if you had to change 10 % of the manual and interface strings from the previous version, assuming that a total of approximately 15 000 words actually need to be translated, the cost of translation done by professionals would be about 2 250 US dollars. And I am being generous, because given the minimal number of new functionalities in 6.0, the percentage of new translation to be done is probably closer to 1 % than 10 %. The time taken to translate 15 000 words by two professional translators is no more than 1 week, and translation can be done while beta testing is completed. Why is Dantz uselessly delaying the publication of localized versions of its software?
  3. Anybody knows when Retrospect 6 for Mac OS will be available in French? Panther has been out for a few months now, but I still cannot install it on our computers until we get Retrospect 6. BTW, 200 US dollars is a big price to pay for a compatibility upgrade.
  4. En réponse à: Mayoff said: Please see the following in our Knowlegebase: http://www.dantz.com/index.php3?SCREEN=kbase&ACTION=KBASE&id=27710 1) The first workaround described in this article does not work. 2) The second workaround describes exactly my configuration. All of my computers, including the backup computer, get their addresses wirelessly from the NAT and are in the same group. And this workaround does not work neither. 3) Anyway, what use would it be to be able to backup one computer only? I did not spend money on Retrospect Workgroup to backup one computer.
  5. I followed all the steps meticulously, but all it ended up doing is that I am now unable to modify the base station configuration through the Airport Admin utility. And my backup computer still cannot see the clients.
  6. Can Retrospect Workgroup work with an Airport network other than by doing complex settings with ports? After all, Airport is common place in the world of Macintosh computing. Couldn't Dantz make their software compatible with Airport? I can ping any computer on my Airport network, share the files and probably also make them sing together... but Retrospect, this technological wonder, cannot see its clients. Amazing and frustrating! My configuration is very basic: three computers with Mac OS 10.2.6 networked through an Airport Extreme base station. The backup computer, an iMac with Retrospect Workgroup 5.0.238 (the most recent version), cannot "see" the two clients, another iMac as well as an iBook with Retrospect Client 5.0.540 (the most recent version). Is there a simple solution? I do not understand any of this port 497 business which I have seen in other threads.
  7. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    I just updated Jaguar to Mac OS 10.2.4. The fix_prebinding crashes upon launching Retrospect Workgroup are gone. So, the bug was most likely a system bug.
  8. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    Thank you for your post, Hugh.
  9. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    Dave, I unplugged my Firewire devices, then I deleted /Library/Caches/com.apple.LaunchServices.LocalCache.csstore. It does not make a difference. Retrospect still makes fix_prebinding crash.
  10. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    As you say, Rob, running update_prebinding does not fix Retrospect. Reinstalling Retrospect does not work neither, nor reinstalling your whole system, nor unplugging devices. In Apple's forums, I noticed that users were having fix_prebinding crashes caused by other applications than Retrospect. OmniWeb seems to be one of them, for example. However, not all applications cause these crashes. Far from that. And certainly not all applications still cause the crash after you update the prebinding information for your whole system. As I mentionned previously, on my computer, Retrospect is the only application that causes the fix_prebiding crash. Also, these crashes seem to be linked to Mac OS 10.2.3, and not to previous versions of the OS. Therefore, my hypothesis right now is that the crashes are caused by an incompatibility between some applications and Mac OS 10.2.3. When you try to run update_prebinding on the whole hard drive, Retrospect does no cause any error. But if you try to specifically update the prebinding of the files in the Retrospect 5 folder, you get all kinds of errors. Here is a sample: sudo update_prebinding -root "/Applications/Retrospect 5.0" 2003-01-08 21:14:08.789 update_prebinding[553] Start of update_prebinding 2003-01-08 21:14:08.797 update_prebinding[553] Start of search for binaries in packages... 2003-01-08 21:14:08.799 update_prebinding[553] Discover library dependencies (0/1 complete) 2003-01-08 21:14:08.815 update_prebinding[553] Discover library dependencies (1/1 complete) 2003-01-08 21:14:08.817 update_prebinding[553] Build dependency graph (0/1 complete) 2003-01-08 21:14:08.819 update_prebinding[553] Start of search for binaries on disk... 2003-01-08 21:14:09.100 update_prebinding[553] update_prebinding (finding dependent libraries for /Applications/Retrospect 5.0/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Carbon): can't open file: /Applications/Retrospect 5.0/System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework/Versions/A/Carbon (No such file or directory) 2003-01-08 21:14:09.104 update_prebinding[553] update_prebinding (finding dependent libraries for /Applications/Retrospect 5.0/System/Library/Frameworks/Cocoa.framework/Versions/A/Cocoa): can't open file: /Applications/Retrospect 5.0/System/Library/Frameworks/Cocoa.framework/Versions/A/Cocoa (No such file or directory) [...] The binding paths above are erroneous. Isn't this a clear hint about where the problem comes from? To update the prebinding, Mac OS needs to get some information from the application as to what system library objects it needs to use. In this case, it seems that Mac OS 10.2.3 is not getting the information properly from Retrospect (and likely from other applications which are not quite ready for 10.2.3). Again, I can never say it enough: this is an issue that only Dantz's programmers can solve. They are the ones who can find out what needs to be changed in the code for the prebinding to occur properly. I suggest they contact OmniWeb's programmers, who have already recognized that the fix_prebinding crash is an issue. They are presently trying to find out how to fix it. We are wasting our time discussing and doing Dantz's job.
  11. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    Regarding these devices: - External LaCie Firewire 56 GB hard drive (where the Retrospect catalogs are stored) - External LaCie Firewire CD-RW, model LTR-48125W Yes, I have tried with and without the external devices. It does not make a difference. The crash happens the same way. Besides. The iMac G4 does not have any external devices, and the crash occurs anyway.
  12. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    At least, there are two of us now (three if we include my friend's iMac G4). Thank you for posting your message, Steffi. Dave, I was not trying to "hold back" information. The OS interface language just did not seem to be factor that mattered, even though I was starting to have doubts recently since neither you nor Dantz could reproduce the problem. As you can see now, it seems that my first feeling was right. You went through a lot of trouble to help me with this matter, Dave. Thank you very much. Now, let Dantz take their responsibility and do their homework properly. Because they have the source code and they have access to Apple's developer information regarding 10.2.3, they do not necessarily have to be able to reproduce the problem in order to fix it. And they have at least two users to do the testing if necessary.
  13. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    In reply to: "I saw no crashes in the console, no files were written to /Library/Logs/CrashReporter/ I never saw either update_prebinding or fix_prebinding try and run." Even if you probably know it, I thought I would mention that the fix_prebinding crash reports should be in the root Library, not the user Library. Also, to be really sure, you could do a file search on the whole hard drive for "fix_prebinding". The one thing my iMac DV and the iMac G4 have in common is that they both have French as the Mac OS interface language... now, don't start reinstalling Mac OS in French. But, I am starting to think that it could be a language specific Mac OS bug. At least one other bug related to international versions of Mac OS X was uncovered in 10.2.3. It had to do with iTunes' version number, which had not been updated in languages other than English and caused Software Update to constantly want to update iTunes, even just after updating it. The bug was reported on MacFixit with a workaround. But why would Retrospect be the only application to cause the crash? I will post a message in Apple's Mac OS X forum to see if people using other interface languages than English observe fix_prebinding crashes using Retrospect or other applications. In the mean time, someone at Dantz [not you, Dave] could be helpful for a change and try Retrospect Workgroup French on Mac OS 10.2.3 with the French interface. And, by the way, even if Microsoft makes poor software, it happens that Apple has chosen IE as the default browser on all of its computers sold for the past 4 or 5 years. Therefore, if I was Dantz, I would stick with 31-character file names (which is not that hard to do) in FTP and other download sites.
  14. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    I am just back from testing Retrospect on an iMac G4. I was able to reproduce the fix_prebinding crash exactly as it occurs on my iMac DV. Here is the procedure I followed. The iMac G4 was bought new about a month ago. The Mac OS 10.2.3 system update was done about ten days ago through Software Update. The update went smoothly, according to the owner of the computer, which has Classic (9.2.2) installed. Retrospect had never been installed before on this computer. 1) I checked the crash logs for the computer. Only two crashes had been reported: one IE crash and one MS-Word crash. No system crash. 2) I installed Retrospect Workgroup 5.0.238 French with driver update 3.3.104. 3) I launched the Console and set it to report crashes automatically. 4) I launched Retrospect and entered my licence number. 5) I waited for a minute without doing any change in Retrospect's default settings. ---- No fix_prebinding crash occurred at this point, which was expected since another process than fix_prebinding does the prebinding when an application is launched for the first time. This process is called update_prebinding. Every time I reinstalled Retrospect from scratch on my own computer, I never observed the fix_prebinding crash on the first launch. [And anybody who is serious about trying to reproduce a bug would certainly do more than one attempt anyway.] ---- 6) I quit Retrospect and launched it again. 7) After a few seconds, the Console reported a fix_prebinding crash. 8) I relaunched Retrospect twice and observed the fix_prebinding crash each time. ---- Only one fix_prebinding crash occurred on each launch, instead of two, which could be explained by the absence of programmed backups. But the fact is that at least one fix_prebinding crash occurs each time Retrospect is launched. ---- 9) I quit Retrospect. 10) I quit the Console. 11) I deleted all Retrospect files from the iMac G4. Bug confirmed. Do your homework, Dantz. Am I clear enough?
  15. bernarddesgagne

    Kernel Protection Failure

    Open an incident for 69,95 USD? No thanks. I paid 293,80 EUR in October for Retrospect Workgroup. Over the past two years, I have paid more than 500 USD for Dantz software. That is enough in my view to get a proper response when I need help. So, when we are talking about rudeness, this is what I mean. And the person at Dantz's support I talked to on the phone told me that I was far from being the only one complaining about this policy. Eventually, Dantz might say the bug is in Apple's system software or keep pretending that they can't reproduce it. And I will have to pay the bill. If the fee was something like 9,95 USD per incident, for example, it would be enough to deter people from phoning all the time without even looking for the solution in other resources, and such a fee would be respectful of loyal users. The registered user could be allowed three incidents per year at this rate, then have to pay a higher fee for following incidents. I don't think this would cause Dantz to go bankrupt. By the way, the problem could be the files I downloaded from Dantz's site, which is a real mess when it comes to versions: broken links, wrong version numbers, etc. For example, the French updates page lists the latest Client update as "Retrospect Client 5.0.540". But when I download the file, I get an archive called "retrospect_50238_clients_fr.sit". Then, when I decompress it, the folder is called "Retrospect Client 5.0". And when I dig into the folder and subfolders, I find an updater called "Mac_Client_Update_FR_5_0.rcu". So, where is "5.0.540" now? Another example? When I download the French 5.0.238 updater, I get a file called "retrospect_50238_workgroup_fr.s". The system tries to open it with Word! You must manually change the extension to "sit" in order to decompress the files. Any experienced Mac user knows this, but it certainly reflects a certain carelessness on the part of Dantz. An FTP site including all US and international versions, in properly named files and folders, would be an efficient way to distribute updates. Step one of proper technical support would have been to make sure that I have an uncorrupted update file for the 5.0.238 French version and the latest version of the driver. I don't even know if, for 69,95 USD, I would get the proper files. And if I did, and it solved the problem, this will most certainly not be considered a bug. I would have lost 69,95 USD due to Dantz's poor management of its Web site. Furthermore, I am skeptical about the seriousness and completeness of your so-called tests. And I have good reasons to be, given your erratic answer recently to a user inquiring about Retrospect's compatibility with Mac OS 10.2.3. You were very quick to answer it was compatible, until the user said he had got conflicting information on the phone. There seems to be a communication gap between you and Dantz's lab. Considering that the fix_prebinding crash problem is very precise and consistently occurs the same way, it should be quite simple for a programmer to check the code and determine if there is a possibility that the fix_prebinding process gets the wrong directory path from Retrospect, in Mac OS 10.2.3. Judging by the posts in various forums, there are quite a few file system problems related to various applications, which were not ready for 10.2.3 (for example, Virtual PC 6). Retrospect could be another one of them, although probably to a lesser degree. We all agree that Retrospect is a fine product, in general, but I know I am not the only user who is sadly disappointed with Dantz's technical support policy.
×