Out of Office until Oct 3

[skank]

This can go on forever

Some people complain

Some people dont

 

But complaining wont help development further you know.. au contrairy

[BobPhoenix]

4.7 is not stable and has bugs

Stable for me the last time I used it.

5.X is not stable and has bugs

Stable for me no problems encountered could just rename RC4 as final for me.  Haven't tried any of the later RC's yet.

 

Each time yourself or someone reports that they did not encounter (known) problems is like ignoring that there are any.

As an analogy, that is like saying that your Toyota car that was recalled for brake problems (but you continued using it without getting it fixed) has never had a problem when you have used it. So what? It still has potential to cause damage so it must be fixed.

I agree it should be fixed.  The workarounds for 1 of the 4.7 bugs I was doing before it was reported as a bug so I don't really see that as a problem.  The others I have never encountered and until I do they are not a problem for ME.  But I agree they need to be fixed and I wasn't commenting on that.  But all software has bugs in it even so called "stable" code with no discovered bugs.  Everyone still calls them stable and I think you can call unRAID stable.  It has bugs that should have been fixed LOOOONG ago in 4.7.1 but that doesn't mean it isn't stable.

[NAS]

To be fair it depends on what background you come from as to what you define "stable" as.

 

jaybee makes a valid point in a fair way. Saying it is "stable for me" is meaningless to his definition of stable. He is far from alone on using this definition.

 

However there are many people who consider stable as being "stable for them". This is equally valid but a different definition.

 

It is unlikely anyone from either group will ever agree on a common definition so there is very little point is debating that aspect here.

 

 

[lionelhutz]

The lack of comms is unacceptable to his customers.

 

You're speaking for me now?

 

If it's unacceptable to you then you should go find a better alternative.

[jaybee]

The lack of comms is unacceptable to his customers.

 

You're speaking for me now?

 

If it's unacceptable to you then you should go find a better alternative.

 

This is unrealistic. If you pay for a product you expect it to function and/or some level of support. Why should I go to find an alternative because the business will not communicate with me? Would you go to find an alternative for all your products you buy just because you could simply not get any communication from the seller? No, you would pursue it and make attempts to find out information etc. Unraid is not just about the cost of the licence - as others in this thread have already mentioned. A lot of commitment from us as buyers has gone into the product. A lot of time, effort, contribution and cost in specifically choosing hardware to suit unraid has gone on. To say we should all go away if we do not like it, I think is very unfair. We all want it to succeed of course, but some of us are very frustrated with the lack of information. We are stuck in a difficult position not knowing what to do.

All of this can be solved from one simple update from Tom, then at least we can make a decision on what we want to do. The silence in this case is the damage.

[reggie14]

I don't think it makes much sense to hung up on the semantics of what is and isn't "stable."  As others have pointed out, all software contains bugs.    In my opinion, it is less of matter of creating a bug-free product and more a matter of fixing bugs in a timely manner once they're identified.  I don't think 22 months between official releases is fixing bugs in a timely manner, particularly when the bug fixes are known (I'll cut Tom more slack over the compatibility issues he's been running into, but I still think its on him to come up with an adequate workaround/fix).

[ixnu]

Back to the OP -  Tom implied that he would check back sometime after 3 October and he has not. It's a simple question - Why the lack of information and guidance to the existing customers after implying that he would?

 

It feels like I'm being disrespected by a company that I have been passionate about for years. LimeTech is at serious risk of losing its respect with its existing customer base. The lack of communication from LimeTech goes something like this...look, I have been seriously stumped by a string of technical challenges with the linux kernel. Please give me a break while we all wait for patches upstream, but please keep buying my products through this period of uncertainty and no communication.

 

That may not be what Tom intends, but that's what's out there.

 

We are all adults here and I absolutely understand the challenges Tom has with respect to supporting disparate x86 hardware, so I'm not going to bash him simply because he couldn't pull it off. My point is that there is no real connection or deep passion about the customer and maybe the product itself. I have been holding off on purchases of hardware in anticipation of Ver 5, but I'm in the dark with where all this is really headed. All I want is Lime-Tech to respect me as a paying customer and simply be honest and deliver what you have promised.

[squirrellydw]

It will be released when it's released.  What if Tom just renames RC8 to final, would that make you all happy?  Why does he need to tell you that it's not ready yet, because he said he would?  He said "I had hoped to complete and release 5.0 'final' before leaving, but just ran out of time.  I'm really sorry about that, and when we get back, we will be hitting it hard to get this done a.s.a.p." So where does it say it would be released in October??  He had hoped it would be done, but ran out of time and now the Holidays are here so I'm sure he is busy.

 

You all need to calm down a little.  Maybe he is adding more features to it, maybe he is waiting till his new servers are ready?  Who knows but it doesn't really matter.  We all want it to be released and would like more communication from him but this is the way he does things so you just need to learn and live with it.  If you don't like it find another product or write one yourself. 

 

This form is not offical, if you need HELP you are supposed to email him but don't expect a response if you ask about BETA software.  This form is for more user to user help IMHO.

 

Why don't we just leave this thread go till the new year and see what happens?

[Dougy]

he did eventually reply to this thread.  It was the nature of his reply that set things of again.

 

Since when do you add new features to an RC?

[lionelhutz]

This is unrealistic. If you pay for a product you expect it to function and/or some level of support. Why should I go to find an alternative because the business will not communicate with me? Would you go to find an alternative for all your products you buy just because you could simply not get any communication from the seller?

 

 

What is unrealistic?  If I'm not happy with how a company is treating me then I take my business somewhere else and I will tell anyone who's interested what happened with the company I left. If I might lose money then it pisses me off but I'd rather move on that cry about it for months on end.

 

I think the bigger issue is that people either can't or really really don't want to move on. unRAID is unique enough that it leaves people badly wanting it despite there being other ways to serve files.

 

At the end of the day, you can either relax and wait, or you can move on. No complaints you post here will change a damnd thing.

 

 

[squirrellydw]

he did eventually reply to this thread.  It was the nature of his reply that set things of again.

 

Since when do you add new features to an RC?

 

Please read the first topic

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=22604.0

[NAS]

...

You all need to calm down a little. ...

 

You realise every time you say something like this it just makes people annoyed and starts it again don't you?

[jaybee]

What's to say my request for a refund would be met with any kind of response given the evidence so far?

[BobPhoenix]

What's to say my request for a refund would be met with any kind of response given the evidence so far?

So you won't try it?  Tom seems quite reasonable if you have a USB thumb drive fail and you ask for a new key from posts I've seen (I'll go looking for those posts if you want).  Do you have personal experience or know someone that was denied a refund?

[Influencer]

Happy holidays everyone!

[jaybee]

What's to say my request for a refund would be met with any kind of response given the evidence so far?

So you won't try it?  Tom seems quite reasonable if you have a USB thumb drive fail and you ask for a new key from posts I've seen (I'll go looking for those posts if you want).  Do you have personal experience or know someone that was denied a refund?

 

I'm saying there is no response on these forums nor to my email I have sent them already.

[lionelhutz]

Happy holidays everyone!

 

Happy holidays to you too. Thanks for your plug-in support! 

[squirrellydw]

What's to say my request for a refund would be met with any kind of response given the evidence so far?

So you won't try it?  Tom seems quite reasonable if you have a USB thumb drive fail and you ask for a new key from posts I've seen (I'll go looking for those posts if you want).  Do you have personal experience or know someone that was denied a refund?

 

I'm saying there is no response on these forums nor to my email I have sent them already.

 

thats because you asked about beta software.  I hope that if you get a refund that you have to send back your key.

 

Happly Holidays

[BobPhoenix]

What's to say my request for a refund would be met with any kind of response given the evidence so far?

So you won't try it?  Tom seems quite reasonable if you have a USB thumb drive fail and you ask for a new key from posts I've seen (I'll go looking for those posts if you want).  Do you have personal experience or know someone that was denied a refund?

 

I'm saying there is no response on these forums nor to my email I have sent them already.

I understand now.  Thank you for clarifying.

[justme]

  I never planned on posting in this thread, since it seems to generally not be productive. However I just wished to thank all the kind people on this forum, for all you do.... Helpfull posts, plugins, hardware suggestions, and deals. Of course this absolutely includes Tom, of Limetech. I can't even begin to imagine the effort he has put into UnRaid, over all these years. I do understand that most of the issues with Ver 5.x have been(IMHO) with the kernal and largely caused by supporting additional hardware configurations. Still I'm happy with my purchase even at this point, nearly 2 years later. Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to minimize ANYONE's veiws/issues, etc.  I must admit atleast 2 times(a little under a year ago) I seriously looked at possible alternatives, but nothing out there does what UNRAID does, and does all that I want. My only concern is that Ver5.0 stays feature frozen so an official stable is there for the plugin makers to build for. Leave anything but bugs for 5.1, IMHO.  So, in the end... I'm still here using UnRaid and overall happy. In the end I'm sure, in time, things will work out great for the community.

 

  My opinion means nothing more that anyone else's, but I just wanted to let the community know there are still happy/hopefull users out here. I may be an optimist, but I just can't see such a great product and userbase not succeeding. It's just a matter of time. <<<please take as a joke<<<

 

Peace and may a finished V5 greet us all soon,

/justme

[rdenney]

To be fair it depends on what background you come from as to what you define "stable" as.

 

jaybee makes a valid point in a fair way. Saying it is "stable for me" is meaningless to his definition of stable. He is far from alone on using this definition.

 

However there are many people who consider stable as being "stable for them". This is equally valid but a different definition.

 

It is unlikely anyone from either group will ever agree on a common definition so there is very little point is debating that aspect here.

 

Actually, it is easy to determine "stable for whom". When all the requirements for a particular release have been fulfilled, and remain fulfilled, then it is stable. When it is unstable while attempting to fulfill an unstated requirement, that is a matter for a future release.

 

The real argument comes in determining what requirements must be fulfilled. And here we have what seems to me a key part of the issue. Mr. Lime-Tech apparently wants features that would make his upcoming hardware product more effective, and those use cases are part of HIS concept of operation and he therefore has requirements related to those uses. But nobody here is using that hardware product, so those features may not be driven by the use cases of current users.

 

Of course, the requirements here are not really documented very well or at all, so it does open the door to debate about what the current use cases actually are. That's a more crucial argument that the one about whether a release candidate can get a new feature or not. I certainly want a new feature in a stable release--I want the r8169 driver back in there.

 

My suspicion is that the hardware product has consumed more resources than was expected, and Mr. Lime-Tech is possibly hoping for a change of fortunes to make the progress he desires with that product. Perhaps he thinks that will happen momentarily, allowing him to focus back on issues affect some users here. Maybe that outcome has been elusive, and if related to a new product, he might not want to bare his soul on this public forum.

 

(He is still alive, at least. I got my license in a day.)

 

There is a free version of unRAID so it is indeed possible to fully test the product's main features before committing to making a purchase. That's what I did. When I was sure I'd found a way to support my hardware, I went ahead and bought the license.

 

For me, weaknesses include leaving off the r8169 driver from the latest release (the one that replaced it does not work with cheapie 8169-based NICs), and documentation that assumes everything goes swimmingly and provides little explanation of why things are so one can have a direction if they don't. The second is not uncommon, even in products that cost orders of magnitude more than unRAID. The first was fixed by a forum member, though it requires a kernel not downloadable from Lime-Tech. I had to use the latest release to provide hardware support for my hard disk controller, which is pretty high performance and now pretty cheap but which was not supported until recently.

 

As I said before, I'm here because NAS4FREE had issues I could not resolve, and their support forum was too inactive to get reasonable support. Support here was terse but it got me pointed in the right direction so I could learn enough to solve my issues, and I can live with that. NAS4FREE attempts far more than unRAID, with even less general support. But, hey, it's free!

 

But my use cases are easy-peasy. I only want a file server, not a media server, so all the media serving applications that concern many here will never get installed by me. That's the danger of assuming one's own success should be transferable.

 

What would help is a clear set of use cases and requirements, at least at a high level, to guide version updates and configuration management. I gather that's what the Roadmap was for, but it takes effort to keep that up. It's easy to start a sentence with "somebody should..."

 

Rick "who does systems engineering for a living" Denney

[Dougy]

he did eventually reply to this thread.  It was the nature of his reply that set things of again.

 

Since when do you add new features to an RC?

 

Please read the first topic

http://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=22604.0

 

OK so by definition we are not running RC's then.  something more like beta 20? 

 

 

[cfmjohn]

Sorry to go off topic but I'm now concerned. Can anyone point me to the description of the bug(s) in 4.7 and how to avoid them. I've been running 4.7 for over a year now and not seen anything but I'm worried that I might do something accidentally to trigger them.

 

I've tried searching the forum but I'm not getting useful hits.

Thanks.

[S80_UK]

Sorry to go off topic but I'm now concerned. Can anyone point me to the description of the bug(s) in 4.7 and how to avoid them. I've been running 4.7 for over a year now and not seen anything but I'm worried that I might do something accidentally to trigger them.

 

I've tried searching the forum but I'm not getting useful hits.

Thanks.

 

In this very thread, among other places...

 

 

To my knowledge there are atleast 3 major issues with version 4.7.

JoeL summarised them earlier in this thread (sections copied below). The above linked user modified version of 4.7 fixes only issue (1) of the below, plus it's a user modified/created version. As much as I appreciate this users efforts, it is not the advertised official stable/finished 4.7 product that I and other customers paid for. If it is such a good build, why does Tom/Limetech not sticky the thread? Why does he not make an official version like this with these fixes or or or...? There is again, no commitment from him towards fixing these issues.

 

"...4.7 has three known bugs that will corrupt data fixed in the 5.0-rc8a release...

 

1.  The bug where a "write" to a disk could be lost during a re-construction or parity calc...

 

2.  The bug where an MBR on existing disks will be overwritten and result in it pointing to the WRONG sector. (this occurs when the super.dat file on the flash drive is rebuilt.... as when a flash drive dies and is replaced)...

 

3.  The bug where a temporary file created on a disk, when renamed to the original name in a user-share other than the original physical disk does not unlink the original file, resulting in a duplicate file error AND the original contents NOT being re-written, leading to potential data loss.  No work-around, the use of temporary files is common on many file transfer/copy programs.  This bug exists on all but the very most recent 5. releases.

 

Joe L."

 

But to put this in context - very few users have seen any of them in the long time that 4.x has been around.

[PeterB]

Can anyone point me to the description of the bug(s) in 4.7 and how to avoid them.

 

Joe L, very helpfully, itemised them for us in reply 74 in this thread.