• @[email protected]OP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 months ago

    Well, at least you admit it, not everyone does.

    I do agree that they’re out of date, but that wasn’t their point, their software somehow doesn’t like the NASes, so they had to look into where the problem was. But, their first thought was “let’s tell them they’re no good and tell them which ones to buy so we wouldn’t have to look at the code”.

    • @Ziglin
      link
      22 months ago

      That sounds extremely lazy. I’d expect more from a dev team.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Me too, but apparently, that wasn’t the case.

        My reasoning was, they’d have to send someone over to do tests and build the project on site, install and test, since we couldn’t give any of those NASes to them for them to work on the problem, and they’d rather not do that, since it’s a lot more work and it’s time consuming.

        • @Ziglin
          link
          12 months ago

          Couldn’t they remotely connect to them?

          • @[email protected]OP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Yeah, they tried that a few times, the software would glitch and Windows would either BSOD or just freeze (had something to do with how their HASP dongle license communicated with the software and the drivers it used, nothing to do with our issue whatsoever, lol). In the end, they had to come down and debug the issue on a separate rig and install. We just couldn’t have those interruptions in production.