[Chaos_Realm]

I take issue with someone being referred to as an "engineer" when they have no engineering education.

An engineer can be anyone. Unfortunately its such a broad profession that that encompasses anyone from a home tinkerer to a aerospace engineer (or software engineer). I am a Civil Engineer (student) and I too find it annoying that this is the case but hey, not much one can do about that.

As for Jeff Van de Walker, he may well be managing the QC area. This might take him away from the physical testing phases, but he is the name that is put in the shooting gallery when one (or more) of his staff make a mistake. I also am a strong believer in self taught people being the almost as good as those who have been through training, sure there are some that are not up to standard but a lot of those i know who are self taught in their profession are successful. They have a desire that I see to be missing in a lot of those who have formal education.

It still doesn't reflect very well on the company that it was so buggy. Every release should be put under a microscope, with testing of even the basic features and performance due to the collateral effect modifications in one feature might have on another.

[Class A]

...most people do not work in the profession they went to school for, and Jeff has been at his job for almost 14 years. It is not what you know, but knowing who to ask...

I didn't claim that it isn't possible to excel in an area for which you weren't educated for.

The situation here is different. Adobe's QC is clearly lacking. As is, LR 4.0 is unusable, unless you have never used LR before and don't have any catalogs to import. So there is no question that the output is bad and I just offered an explanation for the reasons behind that bad output.

Do you have another explanation other than staff that aren't quite qualified to do their job?

[Class A]

My full support on that one, Riff!

So you are supporting him in attacking me, which is supposedly something one must not do?

Moderator?

FYI, I didn't mean to attack the particular Adobe employee I mention in my OP. I'm mainly annoyed about Adobe referring to their staff as "engineers" with absolutely no justification in many cases, and of course about the low standards some software companies managed to establish.

If the bugs are so obvious please spell them out in full.

I don't get your drift. Are you asking me to points in the code where the problems are?

It doesn't matter anyhow, because Adobe will be the first to agree that they should have caught the import bug, the plugin bug, and the performance bugs, before shipping 4.0.

We are not even talking about the hundreds of bugs that have been part of LR since 1.0. We are just talking about three big show stoppers.

I'm amazed to see people jumping to the defence of a company which ships such a low quality product.

[alohadave]

So you are supporting him in attacking me, which is supposedly something one must not do?

Moderator?

Not as much fun to be on the receiving end is it?

FYI, I didn't mean to attack the particular Adobe employee I mention in my OP. I'm mainly annoyed about Adobe referring to their staff as "engineers" with absolutely no justification in many cases, and of course about the low standards some software companies managed to establish.

When you run Adobe, you can organize it however you wish and call the employees whatever you wish. Until then, make bug reports about defects in the product, and don't attack specific people, even if you don't agree with their qualifications. Ranting about the perceived personal failings of someone you know nothing about makes you look petty.

[Class A]

An engineer can be anyone.

The term does not seem to be protected in some countries, correct.

However, there are professional organisations that certify people according to their education/skills. There are formal, agreed upon criteria as to which university degrees produce engineers and which don't.

In general, "engineer" instils a high skill level and professionalism. Adobe representatives know why they write "I'll pass this on to the engineers" and not "I'll pass this on to the programmers".

I also am a strong believer in self taught people being the almost as good as those who have been through training, sure there are some that are not up to standard but a lot of those i know who are self taught in their profession are successful.

I agree. Jeff may be the good guy and has to work with others who don't do their job. I don't really know. My post (who has been interpreted to be more agressive than it was meant to be by many) was just offering a potential explanation.

It still doesn't reflect very well on the company that it was so buggy. Every release should be put under a microscope, with testing of even the basic features and performance due to the collateral effect modifications in one feature might have on another.

+1!

[Class A]

Not as much fun to be on the receiving end is it?

I'm fine, thanks.

Just puzzled by the logic of doing something to someone that you don't want them to do to others. Either attacking someone personally is not good and then Bramela shouldn't do it to me, or it is acceptable after all. Make up your minds.

Until then, make bug reports about defects in the product, and don't attack specific people, even if you don't agree with their qualifications.

You didn't understand my first post. And I don't accept orders from you, thanks again.

[Chaos_Realm]

The term does not seem to be protected in some countries, correct. However, there are professional organisations that certify people according to their education/skills. There are formal, agreed upon criteria as to which university degrees produce engineers and which don't. In general, "engineer" instils a high skill level and professionalism. Adobe representatives know why they write "I'll pass this on to the engineers" and not "I'll pass this on to the programmers".

Yeh this is very true, I get quite a lot of enjoyment out of dropping the term 'engineering' to people, and I have noticed that many people subconsciously take a more respectful stance in conversations when i mention it. Rather amusing.

I agree. Jeff may be the good guy and has to work with others who don't do their job. I don't really know. My post (who has been interpreted to be more agressive than it was meant to be by many) was just offering a potential explanation.

Forums or non verbal communication in general, no matter how civilised, leads to so much mis interpretation due to the difficulties of picking the tone of a post.

[Bramela]

i have not made any statements or actions on this as a Moderator, not even expressed the word. I have stated my opinion in this and for you to use this (Mod issue) against my statements, ( my personal opinion) is rather unacceptable.

If you have any issue on this, me being a Mod. then you are quite welcome to report me. I have expressed my personal opinion and nothing else.

I am done with this, it is a dead issue IMHO.

[rawr]

As is, LR 4.0 is unusable, unless you have never used LR before and don't have any catalogs to import.

At this point I may as well chip in again.

FWIW, even though this thread is well and truly going down the toilet, I recently bought and installed LR4 on a Win7 system and have had no problems using it, or importing my LR3 catalogs. Everything works fine with my 30,000 or so images in the catalogs.

Probably not worth the upgrade price though, since the new features are hardly incredible, and in many regards LR4 seems to be just playing catch up with some of DXO Optics Pro's long established features.