Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission + - Atlassian's "Confluence debacle", and the fallout from users (atlassian.com) 11

panzerIVD writes: Disgruntled customers of Confluence (the content-sharing application created by Atlassian) have been sharing their discontent in a somewhat hidden area on the documentation area of Confluence's product page. The negative commnets page have been growing exponentially over the past few months, and especially most recently. So why are customers so dissatistified? One of the major complaints has been Atalssian's decision to remove the text entering option called Wiki Markup Editor in version 4.0. The other complaints range from:
- issues remaining open or inactive for months, if not years.
- the RTE (the Real Time Editor which is the replacement to Wiki Markup Editor) is full of bugs, and is slow to use compared to the WME.
- The connection between Comfluence and Jira is broken.
- Incredulity over the founder's (of Atlassian) abusive use of foul language to describe and justify their decision to remove the Wiki Markup Editor.
(this last one is not a joke,..and is puzzling beyond belief)

Here are some of the complaints from the Confluence doc site:
"You can't have it both ways,.... you can't post sweet sugary positive comments,.....but hide customers that have a legitimate beef with your decision to remove the WME."

"My company just migrated to the version (5.x.x), which took away the wiki markup editor. After experimenting with the new page editor, I am giving up. Editing existing pages and adding is major pain. Inability to see content in its native format is another drawback. In its arrogance Atlassian decided to remove the essential part of wiki functionality, turning Confluence into a non-a-wiki knowledge management product."

"Removing the Wiki Markup Editor from Confluence,..is like Linux removing the command line interface,...can you imagine the uproar".

"IMO your product managers for Confluence are focused on the wrong priorities. Your reputation is bleeding because of it. Make the new editor support the same editing, search, and revision workflow without serious and unfixable bugs like you currently have, and you'll see this thread quiet down and eventually word of mouth among doc professionals and wiki consultants will improve again."

"I'll add that 15 months ago, in January of 2012, is when I first learned of the 4.x removal of the wiki markup editor. I discovered it when doing routine smoke testing prior to an IT-scheduled upgrade from 3.5.x to the latest version. Naturally, I threw up red flags and prevented our usual upgrade process. We're still on 3.5.x and stopped paying maintenance long ago."

and the most recent:
"It is obvious that Atlassian would rather sanitize the truth and manage perception than simply be who they say they are.
- Still can't get reliable PDF generation out of anything past 3.5.
- Still can't use WYSIWYG editor (which they released, despite their pledge not to, well before it was ready).
Atlassian listens? Fraid not. They're doing for Confluence what Balmer did for Microsoft. And they are damn proud of it.
For the record, I have not heard a single positive response to the change from anyone who has gone through it...except for those that appear on this page. Professional groups, nothing but bad experience... I wonder just how they are collecting their feedback?"

One commenter even went so far as to dutifully list all the issues people have posted in the thread. How many you ask,..well, I count 50 issues.

Matt Hodges, John Masson, and Paul Curren (Atlassian employees) have tried to stem the tide of these negative comments to no avail. They actually seem to make things worse evertime they try to rationalize the removal of the Wiki Markup Editor. There have also been (what appear to be "friends", be they friends, spouses, or actual employees of Atlassian) angry comments fired back at the unhappy users. Seems that all this negative exposure has gotten the better of these supporter's better judgement.

So the question is this,..why would a software company ignore their customer's harsh comments as a result of the removal of functionality?
Coke tried it, Microsoft tried it, and the list goes on,...and after a time,...once the dust settled,...they all buckled and restored the product to its original state. How long will Atlassian stand their ground?

See below for the link to the site where all these complaints can be found. I'm sure the fight is not over yet,..so if you like Mixed Martial Arts,..you're bound to love it. Atalssian's not tapping out,..but they're sure getting a beat down.

Comment Re:Not BS (Score 1) 74

once they shred it to little bits and "diluted" it with non-radio active materials.

Once you "dilute" materials as you describe, they can pass the detectors with little chance of being detected. And if the radioactivity is that low after being "diluted" then by definition it's low enough to be of negligible danger to any consumer product it might make its way into.

It's also worth noting that in the above post citing elevator buttons and belt buckles, neither item emitted enough radiation to be dangerous. In each case, the dose was so low as to be negligible. People need to keep in mind they're exposed to radiation *everywhere*, *everyday*. You get around 3mSV annually just from background sources and nobody is screaming about that, yet here we are worrying about an elevator button that *might* expose you to 1mSV if you licked it every single day for a year.

Perspective, folks. Perspective.

Comment Re:One man's garbage (Score 1) 74

Your example is so ridiculous I'm tempted to ignore it, but perhaps you can benefit from a little criticism here. The incident you cite has nothing to do with recycling irradiated metals into consumer products. A derelict hospital was broken into by thieves who stole a container of radioactive material that had been *illegally* abandoned. This in no way backs up your assertion that "lots of radioactive steel parts end up in the scrap line for being smelted for new cars and stuff." It doesn't even come close. It's not even in the same general area, Hell it's not even in the same *galaxy* of reason as your original assertion. So, you fail. Epic fail. Public Epic Fail at that.

Comment Re:Oh yes, store the waste (Score 1) 74

That has nothing to do with Carter. Breeder reactors are notoriously difficult to operate. I know only one commercial breeding reactor that is still operational and it was built in the USSR.

Perhaps you're unaware of the concepts of cause and effect. Had breeder reactor technology been pursued vigorously *then* it would be much less difficult to operate *now*. Besides, dealing with the waste products from light water reactors is also "notoriously difficult" in case you hadn't noticed. I'd rather deal with the "difficult" option that produces power rather than instead of the one that produces a hundred thousand years worth of dangerous radioactivity.

Comment Re:Oh yes, store the waste (Score 3, Insightful) 74

We don't *need* to "work things out." We already *have* them worked out. You burn your actinides in a breeder reactor until all that's left is negligibly dangerous. You get more power out of a given unit of fuel and you end up with far less waste. What's not to like? Oh, I forgot...the Carter Era put an end to that due to "proliferation concerns." Yeah, we can't have nasty dictators in places like Iran, North Korea, or Pakistan getting nuclear weapons... ...oh, wait...

Comment Re:One man's garbage (Score 3, Interesting) 74

I call bullshit. I work in the nuclear power industry. The amount of screening and safeguards in place to prevent a single contaminated Kleenex from getting offsite is beyond belief. And by "contaminated" I mean something that might have a millirem's worth of stuff on it, not something seriously crapped up like you're hinting at. To intimate that substantial hunks of contaminated metals might systematically get offsite and somehow get smelted into a consumer product is so ridiculous as to be easily dismissed. Can you cite an example of "lots of radioactive steel parts" becoming cars?

Submission + - Social media is getting young people drunk (vice.com)

Daniel_Stuckey writes: The Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) phenomenon is part of why people tend to get addicted to social networking and then depressed. And if you're a young, impressionable teenager, it could pressure you into making sure you, too, are happily intoxicated the next time someone snaps a group shot. That's the gist of the latest study to find that social media photos of people drinking and smoking can influence teens into partaking in the same degenerate behavior. The University of Southern California study was published online today in the Journal of Adolescent Health.

Submission + - You thought BYOD was a thorny problem? BYO-PC will be even harder (citeworld.com)

mattydread23 writes: As BYOD ("bring your own device") becomes ubiquitous, it's natural to consider the possibilities of extending it to PCs, Macs, and other types of notebook computers. The problem is that legacy technology and approaches may make BYO-PC much more challenging than BYOD. In particular, companies already own a ton of PCs and Macs, so adding personal computers on top of that existing infrastructure can create all kinds of thorny political and technical issues. BYO-Mac, however, may not be quite so hard for many organizations.

Submission + - Feds Charge Wall Street Traders with Code Theft (informationweek.com)

CowboyRobot writes: Three men have been charged with stealing proprietary high-frequency trading algorithms from Amsterdam-based trading house Flow Traders. The accusations include that two of the three, while employees of Flow Traders, emailed strategies, algorithms, and source code to themselves before quitting the company. Theft of proprietary code and algorithms from financial firms is increasingly common, with at least six related U.S. prosecutions since November 2010. But while plaintiffs argue that the code is essential intellectual property, the defense can argue that such information is intrinsically linked to the environment in which it's being run, requires teams of programmers to maintain, and thus is of little use to another organization.

Slashdot Top Deals

Adding features does not necessarily increase functionality -- it just makes the manuals thicker.

Working...