What was the greatest thing BEFORE sliced bread?

Last month we discussed obsolescence, the first law of computer hardware. For whatever reason, the same rules don't apply to software. I was reminded of this fact when speaking with a local attorney about windows-based word processing programs. Despite the fact that every computer on this attorney's office network is running Windows 3.1 or 95, everyone is still using WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. The answer to why they were running such old software was simple: it works, it's easy to use, and it is fast. For the attorney, WordPerfect 5.1 was the greatest thing before sliced bread.

I was truly fascinated by this approach to selecting software. Perhaps I've read one too many articles about Windows NT as the end-all be-all of operating systems (although for some tasks, you have to admit that using Windows NT as a platform is something akin to putting a sumo wrestler into a tutu and ballet slippers; while it works, it's not the most graceful thing around). Perhaps I've bought into the game of upgrading hardware every time a new software release is available. And perhaps I've bought into that line of thinking myself. I'm truly a believer of the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of thought, and that applies to software, too.

To be completely honest, most of my writing is done on WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows. Admittedly, there are some drawbacks to running an old 16-bit program like this under Windows 95. There's no support for long file names, no multitasking, and it doesn't really integrate into the rest of the software on my system. On the other hand, it works; it works well, and I've grown so accustomed to working with it that to switch to anything else can be a frustrating experience.

That said, I also have MS Office. I've used Excel for anything spreadsheet-related since switching to Windows years ago, and have found Word to be useful when accepting files from other attorneys who are working in Word. But by and large the legal community is still working with WordPerfect, and I'm starting to find that more and more attorneys are using versions older than even the one I'm using.

Now the blitz is on again. Microsoft is pushing Office 97 as the answer to all your computing problems (I'm still waiting for them to produce a component of Office that will do my job for me; that way I can go where I really want to go today). At the same time, Corel is releasing a new version of their office suite. Unfortunately, there are some side effects to the new programs which will require some users to upgrade (Apparently, Office 97 is using some new file formats which are not backwards compatible).

Still, I find it curious that all performance claims relate to the previous version of the product. Somehow, the statement that "the new version is 50% faster than the previous version" is less impressive when you consider the fact that the previous version was 150% slower than the version before it. Who knows, perhaps the software writers will figure out that people want programs that are fast, and not just because you run them on a Pentium Pro running so fast that it doubles as a toaster. Or perhaps I'm dreaming...

Upgrading Software: The Ultimate Insult!

When I purchased my first copy of WordPerfect 5.1, the product was owned and licensed by WordPerfect Corporation. When I purchased my copy of WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows (my second license), the product was owned and licensed by Novell. The registration for each copy was sent in shortly after they were purchased. Amazingly, I've never received an upgrade notice from Corel for the current version of WordPerfect. Microsoft, on the other hand, was sending me upgrade notices for Word, Excel and Office long before I owned any one of the products. I suppose it had something to do with the fact that I registered my copy of Windows.

Despite the notice, upgrading can be a terribly insulting experience. The first insult is in the upgrade price itself. In some cases today, the upgrade price is higher than the original price of the program. The second insult tends to relate to any version of a program ending in a zero, often called the point-zero version. These versions tend to be full of bugs, and in essence the individual upgrading software has paid for the right to be a beta tester. Perhaps everyone, including Microsoft, should take a lesson from the release of Windows 95. The software was made available to a large number of people while it was being beta-tested. Some people even paid for the right to beta test the operating system. By the time it was released, many of the problems had been resolved. Certainly this is a better approach than sending out a buggy version (i.e., WordPerfect 6.0 for Windows), and then requiring that users pay another upgrade fee to get the fixed version (i.e., WordPerfect 6.1 for Windows).

Until Microsoft, Corel, and other software producers come to this realization, there will be a great number of people who will simply skip the point-zero release and wait for the cleaned-up point-one release. And of course, there will be many who, having been insulted by the upgrade process in the past, will resist upgrading until the version they have will no longer run. Perhaps the software producers will catch the hint one of these days, but in the mean time, I'm not holding my breath...

Got A Story? Share It!

If you hear information about firms moving towards technology, or a new way to become more productive through the use of technology (old or new), or any other war stories, please let me know. Send your story to <Edge@CompLaw.com>. Who knows, the story might be reproduced here.

Samuel Lewis is an attorney practicing Computer/Internet Law and Intellectual Property Law with the firm of Romanik, Lavin, Huss & Paoli in Hollywood, Florida, a member of the Florida Bar's Computer Law Committee, and the creator of COMPLAW^SM (http://www.CompLaw.com). He can be reached at 954-922-4656 or via e-mail: <slewis@CompLaw.com>.

Copyright © 1997, Samuel Lewis. All Rights Reserved.

Back to Article Index