I'd say you're in the first...but note the conditional 'almost'...;)

Didn't get 'into' OS/2 any more than I 'got into' Linux ....tho for a while there  I thought I might get all eager about QNX .....

...but didn't.

There is no need to please everyone as long as you please me.

"ONE. OS/2 was not a bad OS. Better than Windows."

Yea, on OS/2, I wrote a comment on the OS/2 Museum blog about it:

"MS giving up on the 32-bit OS/2 2.0 ~9 months before release [in mid-1991] was also a not so great idea. (Google “OS/2 Microsoft Munchkins” for example)"

It is pretty sad that it took until 1995 for 32-bit programming with preemptive multitasking to become mainstream because of MS's screwups. And don't forget OS/2 did not depend on DOS, and DR-DOS was a big threat to MS at the time. 

Needless to say, the x86-64 transition went much better.

Yeah Baby! You hit the nail on the head!

In the mid 90's i ran a small BBS. The BBS software was called Renegade.

Ran it on Win 3.x and that was all my pc was good for. If I wanted to play doom I had to shut down the BBS to do it. 

Well a friend of mine which was/is a complete and utter computer genius helped me set up OS/2. His fingers hit the keyboard in streaks faster than lightning and I never got a chance to completely understand what all he did do to configure the BBS but I tell ya, that thing was SOLID. In addition I was able to experience very functional multitasking without dragging a single thing down. Even when Win95 came along it did not even hold a candle to the performance that OS/2 gave me. Very sad that the technology took 2 steps back when it died.

Now, on topic: I'd say I fall in to this elusive 56th+ category. I love the products and am a complete ass when I don't like something. Often times I step upon my tongue and offend when that is never my true intent.

Bottom line is that it's hard to be popular to the masses and a good businessman at the same time. Brad has done a hell of a job trying to be both with pretty good success. The irony is that as Frogboy mentioned in a reply, that he was a zealot himself.

PS. I think I'm a grade 3 on the Jafo scale, with a hint of arrogance.

I guess this thread does not bode well for Linux zealots. 

I don't know about all these categories, I just know I am sweet as sugar, honest, tactful, and if anything, a bit on the passive side.  I only dare speak my mind when it's in dire need for the good of all mankind.

"Yeah, right" ....[the only time a double positive becomes a negative]....;)

This may sound funny, but the better a game is, the louder my criticism.

To me, getting a game/product from a D to a C, or a C to a B, isn't that big a deal- it will still be a mediocre game or decent game, worthy of a few hours.

Getting from an A- to a A, that means a lot more to me.  A to A+ means even more.  A+ games are dangerous though.  You make one of those, you will have to deal with insane expecations for a long time.  I call such games "genrebusters"- and I can only think of two games that have made that status with me: Kohan, Ahriman's Gift, and Virtua Fighter 4-5. 

GalCiv II, as an example, was an A- game to me, that became an A with Twilight.  The thing I regret is that it could have been an A+ game.  Brad had some patch ideas that would have fixed most of the remaining flaws, but there was an issue with Brad's computers at home being too new to work on the game or something, which was a real shame.  You could see the fixes that were being thought of in Elemental, and I know from looking at that those fixes would have worked.  This is why I'm really hoping for a GalCiv III with the current Stardock team- all the pieces for an A+ game are in place.

Example of zealotry: I did buy the OD stuff on sale two weeks ago, though I haven't used much of it yet.  I wanted to give something for FE, and I was curious about the FE stuff.  I wasn't going to pay $50 though.  I'll probably buy the things I end up using when they go on sale in the future though, there are some good apps there.  Also waiting for the client to mess around with it more.  Don't like the webpage activation much.

Actually, to those of us who have actually delivered software to customers, that doesn't sound funny at all.  If you don't get any bug reports filed against you, heard nothing bad about your stuff, etc.--it's probably because people aren't using it.   But when you've got a hit, lots of bugs and "bugs" get filed, they're all drop-dead critical priority, divas come out of the woodwork and demand this-or-that and they demand it now, and lots of armchair quarterbacks come along who think they could have done it better.    I cannot think of one single exception.

Yep .....;)

Haha, you and me both. Haven't even considered installing any of the progs yet. But all bought and paid for.

Well, Tweak was a bit better then CCleaner (if they put some of that functionality in there it would be awesome).

Fences is Stardock's best-known app for a good reason, and the pro version offers some features worth paying for.

I should experiment with making my own theme at some point, even if it would be a massive mess of copyright infingement.

It comes down to the old fashioned idea that the customer comes first in business, which lead to long term longevity for said business. Lacking in the get rich quick by any means mentality of most business today.

Zealotry: I bought your product not because I wanted or needed it but to support a cause that I have assigned you to.

That is what makes zealotry dangerous.

When all our future games use Steamworks or are for PS3 or are console only or require a blood sample to use, you'll see people screaming in ways that have nothing to do with the game but because they "supported" us rather than buying a game because...they wanted that game.

I have always been very outspoken on the point that people should only buy things because they want THAT particular thing. if something has obnoxious copy protection or what have you on that particular game, then they should take that into account too.  But if company X (like say Ubi Soft) does something that ticks them off on Game X they shouldn't hold it against them on Game Y.

and what did you learn from life about mucking up the forums, one wonders?

fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me, is probably pretty simplistic. however once you lose someone's trust...

I bought GalCiv II two months after release for full price because you fooled me with your developerjournals which made the game look fun.

I also wanted to support you since you are the only gamedeveloper I know that focus so much on A.I.

Well, if you are considering buying Fallen Enchantress, wait until a long time after the game is released, read lots of perspectives.  If it's a great game then there will come a time when it's obvious to about everyone.  But we will obviously have to wait and cross our fingers.

And remember, fun is subjective.

Companies can lose my business, but they can regain it.

I also see no problem with boycotting a company that fails to meet your expectations for consumer rights.  Consumer rights are only worth something if you're willing to defend them, like any other right.

While there be a few zealots I think the majority would be complaining about the choice for you to use steamworks, Make it a console game or Require a blood sample. Because they wanted the game.. but don't want to accept the additional requirements you set.

There is a few issues here. 1 If game X sold well then chances are the same decisions are going to be made into selling Game Y. Therefore its good for the consumer to assume that the practice hasn't changed.

2.Isn't this free market economics? Consumers Choose the best product based on not only the products qualities but their experience with said companies products. Personal experience is usually the best indicator for a consumer.

Lets look at this this way.. you go into a restaurant, and the food is terrible and the service sucks. Are you going to revisit said restaurant? By your logic you shouldn't hold the service and food quality of day X against them because its day Y.

I might give them another chance if I had some indication that there was a change in the way things were done, but even then my expectations are low since personal experience is much more believable than a companies assurances that they fixed the issues.

Lastly, if a company has repeatedly shown to deliver bad service and or products to a consumer I don't see an issue with not buying from said company anymore.(your Ubisoft example since they still require constant internet checks to play a game or the Gamestop situation fit this on the service side) How many times would you visit the same restaurant and receive bad service and/or food before you would stop going to it all together? Would you continue to patronize them hoping they get it right this time? Or would you spend your money at another restaurant where you know the service and/or products are more to your taste?

P.S. (/begin rant)I can't believe you brought Ubisoft into this. They put constant internet checks (you must have internet to start and even continue playing your game) on their PC games then when their PC games didn't sell they blamed it on there not being a market for PC games. Really? it has nothing to do with your draconian DRM.. its just people don't play PC games, and all those that do are pirates? Your PC games sales figures dropped 90% after the advent of your new shiny DRM and rather than admit that your DRM is the issue and fix it to something PC gamers would accept you start abandoning the PC games market.(after lying and saying that one of your new releases won't require the constant internet check when it actually did) Then wonder why those PC gamers aren't buying your games on consoles instead. FFS Ubisoft buy a clue.(/end rant)

To be more accurate it'd be like not holding the service/food quality of the steak against how it is for the fish...;)

Customer Service is not something that tends to change based on the product purchased. Product quality can vary though, and the point remains.. one is not likely to visit a restaurant to try the fish if they had a steak that was horrible last time they visited. Doubly so if the server was rude inattentive or just plain bad.

Even if they do.. if they find the fish to be as bad as the steak.. what then? continue to work their way down the menu hoping something comes out edible? At some point they have had enough of a companies bad service/product and take their business elsewhere. IF they don't then were back to the zealotry that was spoken of in the original post. Supporting a company not based on its quality of service or product, but just to support it.

I'm just amazed at the suggestion that using past experiences with a company as a core part of the decision whether or not to purchase a product is somehow considered by frog to be bad.

I'll leave that for Brad to explain...

...but adding my 2 cents.... there's obviously going to be a difference between 'past experiences' where they pertain to service vs. to quality/functionality of a physical product.

Ignoring the restaurant, if it were the purchase of a MS Mouse, say....that fell apart when you even took it out of the box....had bits missing...didn't wake up/whatever..... would that automatically decide [for you] that ALL MS Keyboards were going to be a disaster too?

THAT is bad decision-making....;)

No but I would be less likely to buy a MS keyboard based on my experience of the companies  quality of products. How is that bad decision making? It would seem to me that trusting a company to make a keyboard with quality when you know that the mouse they made is shoddy quality is bad decision making. (and if/when that keyboard had issues as well you would have noone but yourself to blame since you knew from previous experience the company didn't maintain a consistent quality or had low quality standards)

Funny use that example because there is a reason I refuse to buy logitech products.. because they consistently have proven to be shoddy in my personal experience. Why would I (or anyone?) continue to support a company who sells inferior products? How many times would YOU have to buy a shoddy product from a company before you would stop buying their products? Do you just ignore the fact that a company sold you a shoddy product and continue to purchase more?

Is it your belief that companies have no control over the quality of their products? I don't get it. If they are willing to sell a poor quality mouse.. what would make you think their quality standards on the keyboard is better?

If you cannot offer consistent quality then why place your name on a product to begin with? Consistency is extremely important to consumer trust. If given the chioce of 2 keyboards, one made by MS whom made your shoddy quality mouse, and another made by jojackskeyboards whom makes the mouse you purchased to replace your MS mouse and has worked well which are you likely to buy?

One made a quality mouse.. the other did not. Are you telling me you wouldn't use your past experience with the quality of products produced by each to decide which to buy?

Ignoring empirical evidence is never sound decision making.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."