What happened to D.B.

[Bill Stewart]

His name was Mike and he
seemed to have lost interest
immediately after he lost
his paid support gig w/JP
when Rex bought Tom out.

The following thread tells a bit more of the story:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.msdos.4dos/browse_thread/thread/5c5d2dd13bda9bb5/608a019f11e5a1c6

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Bill Stewart,

His name was Mike and he
seemed to have lost interest
immediately after he lost
his paid support gig w/JP
when Rex bought Tom out.

Woke up from hibernation finally, did you? Answering to a thread from
January, and then with an uncorrected subject line. ts.ts.ts. :-)

I remember you and Stan were very vociferous opponents of Mike, mostly
from hurt pride, I'd say. Mike did much more for 4DOS than any of the
rest of us, and many people here learnt more by his way of pointing
out errors than from some wishy-squishy pupblic relations support
person.


--
Best regards,

* Klaus Meinhard *
<www.4dos.info>

[Bruce Morgen]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo Bill Stewart,

His name was Mike and he
seemed to have lost interest
immediately after he lost
his paid support gig w/JP
when Rex bought Tom out.

Woke up from hibernation finally, did you? Answering to a thread from
January, and then with an uncorrected subject line. ts.ts.ts. :-)
I remember you and Stan were very vociferous opponents of Mike, mostly
from hurt pride, I'd say. Mike did much more for 4DOS than any of the
rest of us, and many people here learnt more by his way of pointing
out errors than from some wishy-squishy pupblic relations support
person.

Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike. He is (or at least
was) quite a knowledgeable
and helpful person, albeit
one with a very impatient
and irritable personality
that was imo ill-suited to
an end user tech support
job. I'm not taking sides
concerning his treatment
by management, something I
know almost nothing about
and can certainly see from
both Mike's and Rex's POV.

Having been a full-time
tech support professional,
I came to realize that such
a position demands a person
who's both hard-core
rigorous technically *AND*
a pleasant, respectful
representative of the
product s/he's supporting,
so that's what I personally
strove for. YMMV.

[Caesar Romano]

Post by Bruce Morgen
Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike. He is (or at least
was) quite a knowledgeable
and helpful person, albeit
one with a very impatient
and irritable personality
that was imo ill-suited to
an end user tech support

How do you set up that unusual line length formatting in Agent?

[Bruce Morgen]

Post by Caesar Romano

Post by Bruce Morgen
Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike. He is (or at least
was) quite a knowledgeable
and helpful person, albeit
one with a very impatient
and irritable personality
that was imo ill-suited to
an end user tech support

How do you set up that unusual line length formatting in Agent?

It's a function of my inboard
organic computing system -- I
put hard carriage returns at
the end of each line a la a
typewriter. :-)

[Richard Bonner]

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Caesar Romano
How do you set up that unusual line length formatting in Agent?

It's a function of my inboard
organic computing system -- I
put hard carriage returns at
the end of each line a la a
typewriter. :-)

*** Interesting. I didn't look at the headers and thought it might be
because of one of those html forms that are only about 30 characters
wide.

[Caesar Romano]

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Caesar Romano

Post by Bruce Morgen
Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike. He is (or at least
was) quite a knowledgeable
and helpful person, albeit
one with a very impatient
and irritable personality
that was imo ill-suited to
an end user tech support

How do you set up that unusual line length formatting in Agent?

It's a function of my inboard
organic computing system -- I
put hard carriage returns at
the end of each line a la a
typewriter. :-)

What is an "inboard organic computing system"? I've never seen that
terminology.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Caesar Romano,

Post by Caesar Romano

Post by Bruce Morgen
It's a function of my inboard
organic computing system -- I
put hard carriage returns at
the end of each line a la a
typewriter. :-)

What is an "inboard organic computing system"? I've never seen that
terminology.

I think he's speaking of his wetware...

[Bruce Morgen]

Post by Caesar Romano

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Caesar Romano

Post by Bruce Morgen
Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike. He is (or at least
was) quite a knowledgeable
and helpful person, albeit
one with a very impatient
and irritable personality
that was imo ill-suited to
an end user tech support

How do you set up that unusual line length formatting in Agent?

It's a function of my inboard
organic computing system -- I
put hard carriage returns at
the end of each line a la a
typewriter. :-)

What is an "inboard organic computing system"? I've never seen that
terminology.

It just means that I set
my line length manually
by pressing <Enter> to go
to the next line -- the
"inboard organic computing
system" refers to the
human brain. This is a
bit tedious, but it
ensurea my contributions
remain readable even if a
thread gets nested 10+
deep.

[Caesar Romano]

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Caesar Romano
What is an "inboard organic computing system"? I've never seen that
terminology.

It just means that I set
my line length manually
by pressing <Enter> to go
to the next line -- the
"inboard organic computing
system" refers to the
human brain. This is a
bit tedious, but it
ensurea my contributions
remain readable even if a
thread gets nested 10+
deep.

Oh, I understand now. Thanks.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Bruce Morgen,

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Klaus Meinhard
I remember you and Stan were very vociferous opponents of Mike,

Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike.

I answered a Bill Stewart, and mentioned a Stan.

Now who might you be?

[Bruce Morgen]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo Bruce Morgen,

Post by Bruce Morgen

Post by Klaus Meinhard
I remember you and Stan were very vociferous opponents of Mike,

Your memory is faulty -- I
was never an "opponent" of
Mike.

I answered a Bill Stewart, and mentioned a Stan.
Now who might you be?

Well, I'm not "Bill Stewart,"
so apparently the thread got
mangled somewhere along the
line. No harm, no foul....

[Bill Stewart]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Woke up from hibernation finally, did you? Answering to a thread from
January, and then with an uncorrected subject line. ts.ts.ts.  :-)

Forgot to correct the subject line; corrected in this reply.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
I remember you and Stan were very vociferous opponents of Mike, mostly
from hurt pride, I'd say. Mike did much more for 4DOS than any of the
rest of us, and many people here learnt more by his way of pointing
out errors than from some wishy-squishy pupblic relations support
person.

No doubt many learned from Mike (if they were able to overlook what
many agreed was an abrasive personality). He was knowledgeable in his
specific area of JP software knowledge.

(I didn't have hurt pride, by the way. I did take exception to what I
perceived as bullying behavior.)

--
Bill Stewart

[E. S. Fabian]

Bill Stewart:

| No doubt many learned from Mike (if they were able to overlook what
| many agreed was an abrasive personality). He was knowledgeable in his
| specific area of JP software knowledge.

Including me.

| (I didn't have hurt pride, by the way. I did take exception to what I
| perceived as bullying behavior.)

He vociferously rejected any suggestions for new features that were of no
interest to him, and many that could be done through tortuous batch
programs. The acceptance rate of my own suggestions was well below 10% while
he was with JPsoft; over 40% (maybe even more than 50%) since. Many of the
same suggestions he rejected have since been implemented. This is not an
issue of pride, but of user benefits. When the person responsible for
interfacing with the users talks down to them, it alienates users, esp. new
users. If you are just starting a free 30-day trial of a product you never
used before, and your questions are answered by "RTFM", how likely are you
to buy it?

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo E. S. Fabian,

Post by E. S. Fabian
He vociferously rejected any suggestions for new features that were
of no interest to him, and many that could be done through tortuous
batch programs.

He rejected only what he perceived as unnecessary featuritis.

By now, Rex puts out a new version at least once a year, to generate
new income, So he is in constant demand of new "features". That may be
a sound business plan, but my guess is that by now 95% of the features
of TC are never used by any one owner (in Mike's much simpler DOS days
that figure was probably much lower).

You especially tend to ask for a new feature whenever you would have
to write 2 lines of btm code.

Post by E. S. Fabian
The acceptance rate of my own suggestions was well
below 10% while he was with JPsoft; over 40% (maybe even more than
50%) since.

And that has nothing to do with hurt pride, of course...

Post by E. S. Fabian
This is not an issue of pride, but of user
benefits.

You being the user ...?

Post by E. S. Fabian
When the person responsible for interfacing with the
users talks down to them, it alienates users, esp. new users. If
you are just starting a free 30-day trial of a product you never
used before, and your questions are answered by "RTFM", how likely
are you to buy it?

I have never felt "talked down to" by Mike. He had strong opinions,
refrained from pampering the customer the american way (where even an
idiot is made to feel like a king), and often tried to help a customer
by getting him to help himself. Your example above is just fine: I get
to try a product for free, and before reading any freely available
help I ask the support. RTFM is just the right answer in this case.


--
Best regards,

* Klaus Meinhard *
<www.4dos.info>

[Richard Bonner]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo E. S. Fabian,

Post by E. S. Fabian
When the person responsible for interfacing with the
users talks down to them, it alienates users, esp. new users. If
you are just starting a free 30-day trial of a product you never
used before, and your questions are answered by "RTFM", how likely
are you to buy it?

I have never felt "talked down to" by Mike. He had strong opinions,
refrained from pampering the customer the american way (where even an
idiot is made to feel like a king), and often tried to help a customer
by getting him to help himself. Your example above is just fine: I get
to try a product for free, and before reading any freely available
help I ask the support. RTFM is just the right answer in this case.
Klaus Meinhard

*** Unfortunately, reading the manual for many today may be difficult -
at least here in Canada, and definitely in the U.S. Education standards
have fallen so far that new graduates can't read and write well; they
don't understand the meanings of even simple words, nor the basics of
punctuation and grammar. )-:

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Richard Bonner,

Post by Richard Bonner
*** Unfortunately, reading the manual for many today may be
difficult - at least here in Canada, and definitely in the U.S.
Education standards have fallen so far that new graduates can't
read and write well; they don't understand the meanings of even

That may be. But we talk here about the days when computers were
handled by people who knew their bytes and ascii table (DOS) ;-)

Until Mike was "made redundant" (2004), the upheld the standards
beautifully (and he had done so for many years, before the Internet,
back to Compuserve's fora). He was a stout fighter for the command
line, and didn't like the way Rex was going with TC, a fact which may
have played a role in his sudden forced departure.

[E. S. Fabian]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo Richard Bonner,

Post by Richard Bonner
*** Unfortunately, reading the manual for many today may be
difficult - at least here in Canada, and definitely in the U.S.
Education standards have fallen so far that new graduates can't
read and write well; they don't understand the meanings of even

That may be. But we talk here about the days when computers were handled
by people who knew their bytes and ascii table (DOS) ;-)

... and not much else! Reading a technical manual of an unfamiliar product
is no easy task even for experts. But the latest appearance of Mike Bessy in
my archives is from Nov. of 2004, Windows XP days - not the days of
microcomputer pioneers, and this definitely predates his departure. So Mr.
Bonner's comment is, indeed, applicable.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Until Mike was "made redundant" (2004), the upheld the standards
beautifully (and he had done so for many years, before the Internet, back
to Compuserve's fora). He was a stout fighter for the command line, and
didn't like the way Rex was going with TC, a fact which may have played a
role in his sudden forced departure.

I, too, am a command line fanatic, and use only TCC. In fact, now that Rex
wants suggestions primarily (only?) via browser, I may no longer get much
implemented. Or did you mean the original "Take Command"? In the early
Windows days it had the advantage over 4NT that it accepted the X3.64 color
selection escape sequences, so 4DOS programs that depended on ANSI.SYS for
colors were again viable in TCMD16 and TCMD32. Once Rex incorporated them
into 4NT I stopped using TC. TCC is really 4NT, renamed.

As to Mike's dislike of TCMD32, it may have contributed to his forced
departure, but only slightly. I was one of the many customers, who
complained about him. Though I don't recall the specifics, I do remember
that I repeatedly stated an issue, phrasing it many different ways, and Mike
repeatedly misinterpreted it, always identically! He had his own mindset,
and if your post was in a different mindset, it was not considered worthy.
His thorough knowledge of the product was, in fact, a hindrance - he
expected the same from every user.

[Caesar Romano]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:19:11 +0100, "Klaus Meinhard"

Post by Klaus Meinhard
By now, Rex puts out a new version at least once a year, to generate
new income, So he is in constant demand of new "features". That may be
a sound business plan, but my guess is that by now 95% of the features
of TC are never used by any one owner (in Mike's much simpler DOS days
that figure was probably much lower).

Quite so. I reluctantly upgraded from 4nt7 to TCMC9 and found no
advantage for how I use the product. I (wisely IMO) stopped updating
at that point because I didn't want to get into playing the
upgrade-to-the-version-of-the-month game.

[Michael Bednarek]

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:20:52 -0500, Caesar Romano wrote in

Post by Caesar Romano
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 09:19:11 +0100, "Klaus Meinhard"

Post by Klaus Meinhard
By now, Rex puts out a new version at least once a year, to generate
new income, So he is in constant demand of new "features". That may be
a sound business plan, but my guess is that by now 95% of the features
of TC are never used by any one owner (in Mike's much simpler DOS days
that figure was probably much lower).

Quite so. I reluctantly upgraded from 4nt7 to TCMC9 and found no
advantage for how I use the product. I (wisely IMO) stopped updating
at that point because I didn't want to get into playing the
upgrade-to-the-version-of-the-month game.

Same here, but I stopped at 6.01.245. 4NT is an absolute necessity for
me and I couldn't do my job without it (or them, the multiple licenses).
But I got lost when bells and whistles in the form of tabs and name
changes were implemented and I was unsure about drop-in upgrades.

As for Mike Bessy's tone of advice: it was often difficult, but if the
question was framed properly, the response was to the point and the
explanations provided insight. I agree with Klaus Meinhard that RTFM is
indeed sometimes the correct response, and I admit that, having had it
dished out to me, I did just that and found the answer. As for Richard
Bonner's remark that falling education standards preclude many from
understanding moderately technical texts - whenever I get talked-down to
by so-called Customer Service staff, it's time to change suppliers.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Michael Bednarek,

Post by Michael Bednarek
As for Mike Bessy's tone of advice: it was often difficult, but if
the question was framed properly, the response was to the point and
the explanations provided insight. I agree with Klaus Meinhard that
RTFM is indeed sometimes the correct response, and I admit that,
having had it dished out to me, I did just that and found the
answer.

Mike was for a decade the "face" of 4DOS and its later brethren. He
was a challenging and very interesting person. I doubt that without
his 24/7 unfalingly quick support 4DOS would have been such a success.

Mike never was such an innovation barrier as Steve believes. The
boards, fora, groups were of course also read by Tom Rawson and Rex,
so suggestions always reached them and were implemented (or not)
regardless of Mikes opinion.

If a discussion got out of hand (and it was _always_ the other side
who lost control, became personal, abusive, below the belt) Mike never
lost his icy calm, and often Tom Rawson came in to put it to rest. The
official support site was set up mainly because some people couldn't
stop their personal vendetta against Mike in this group, and it
deterred customers.

In hindsight I am tempted to say "Those were the days" :-)

In any case reading the BBS board, the Compuserve forum, this
newsgroup, then later the official support site were a whole lot more
interesting, when Mike was around.

[Caesar Romano]

On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 08:48:52 +0100, "Klaus Meinhard"

Post by Klaus Meinhard
The
official support site was set up mainly because some people couldn't
stop their personal vendetta against Mike in this group, and it
deterred customers.

IMO the current official support site is a headache to read via the
email interface. The quoting is terrible. Perhaps the web interface
is better, but I won't use a web interface unless forced to. Even
then, I would rater abandon the product. That was another factor in
my deciding to get off the update of the month treadmill.

I believe JPSoft would have been better served by a moderated Yahoo
Group. That would have given Rex all the control he needed to prevent
the flame wars and trolling.

[Bill Stewart]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
If a discussion got out of hand (and it was _always_ the other side
who lost control, became personal, abusive, below the belt) Mike never
lost his icy calm, and often Tom Rawson came in to put it to rest. The
official support site was set up mainly because some people couldn't
stop their personal vendetta against Mike in this group, and it
deterred customers.

There were numerous complaints about Mike Bessy's behavior (not just
from me and Steve Fabian).

Regarding people being unable to stop personal vendettas: It seems
Mike was the common denominator in those scenarios. I find it unlikely
that his behavior had nothing to do with his dismissal. I think a more
plausible explanation is that his treatment of customers was a
continuing liability that his product knowledge could not overcome.

--
Bill Stewart

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Bill Stewart,
The second person I meant was not Steve, but a Stan. That said, I
don't want to continue this. I have told what I remember from those
days, and your remembrance may vary.

I just think that Mike's absence from this group after he left JP Soft
(and he offered to partake here, but was immediately personally
attacked) was regrettable. By now, this group is dead anyway, partly
caused by its by now inappropriate name, so that point is moot, too.

I admire Mike's ability to completely vanish from the net. I doubt
that somebody of his abilities is really absent. He must have taken on
a completely new net personality.

[E. S. Fabian]

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo E. S. Fabian,

Post by E. S. Fabian
He vociferously rejected any suggestions for new features that were
of no interest to him, and many that could be done through tortuous
batch programs.

He rejected only what he perceived as unnecessary featuritis.

... unnecessary from his own limited viewpoint.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
By now, Rex puts out a new version at least once a year, to generate
new income, So he is in constant demand of new "features". That may be
a sound business plan, but my guess is that by now 95% of the features
of TC are never used by any one owner (in Mike's much simpler DOS days
that figure was probably much lower).

95% of the code - yes. 95% of the features - I think that's a bit of
exaggeration, but certainly there are a slew of features I don't use,
including the tabbed interface.

New versions just to generate new income? I don't think so. Upgrade prices
are not that much, and I guess few people pay for each upgrade as it beomes
available.

Post by Klaus Meinhard
You especially tend to ask for a new feature whenever you would have
to write 2 lines of btm code.

Post by E. S. Fabian
The acceptance rate of my own suggestions was well
below 10% while he was with JPsoft; over 40% (maybe even more than
50%) since.

And that has nothing to do with hurt pride, of course...

Post by E. S. Fabian
This is not an issue of pride, but of user
benefits.

You being the user ...?

I am a user, and recent versions allow me to do many things earlier versions
could not, some made possible only by features Mike had opposed.

Post by Klaus Meinhard

Post by E. S. Fabian
When the person responsible for interfacing with the
users talks down to them, it alienates users, esp. new users. If
you are just starting a free 30-day trial of a product you never
used before, and your questions are answered by "RTFM", how likely
are you to buy it?

I have never felt "talked down to" by Mike. He had strong opinions,
refrained from pampering the customer the american way (where even an
idiot is made to feel like a king), and often tried to help a customer
by getting him to help himself. Your example above is just fine: I get
to try a product for free, and before reading any freely available
help I ask the support. RTFM is just the right answer in this case.

Obviously you are not a salesman! I may have become overly Americanized, but
I do think that it is the user who has not yet paid that needs help most, to
convince him or her that this is indeed a product worth spending money on,
because it makes it easier for the user to accomplish his goals. And that's
the reason why Rex implemented many things which Mike considered "frills" -
the only reason a user buys this product is to make it easier to do things
that would otherwise be difficult to do.

[Klaus Meinhard]

Hallo Steve,

Post by E. S. Fabian
New versions just to generate new income? I don't think so. Upgrade
prices are not that much, and I guess few people pay for each
upgrade as it beomes available.

Obviously _you_ are not a salesman :-) The main reason for frequent
updates (versus error correction) is of course to generate a steady
stream of income. Rex has often stressed that his main body of
customers are institutions that buy bulk licenses, and these, after a
program is approved, buy every update.

Post by E. S. Fabian
I am a user, and recent versions allow me to do many things earlier
versions could not, some made possible only by features Mike had
opposed.

Mike had an opinion, but never the clout to overrule Rex or even Tom,
who also read the messages.

Post by E. S. Fabian
Obviously you are not a salesman! I may have become overly
Americanized, but I do think that it is the user who has not yet
paid that needs help most, to convince him or her that this is
indeed a product worth spending money on, because it makes it
easier for the user to accomplish his goals. And that's the reason
why Rex implemented many things which Mike considered "frills" -
the only reason a user buys this product is to make it easier to do
things that would otherwise be difficult to do.

For most of that time 4DOS was shareware, without much limited
functionality. Serious copy protection started with perhaps version 6
of 4DOS, and even then there were hackz and crackz about to use it
for free. So there were many people who used the support forum, but
never intended to pay for the product. Mike had a very polite way of
pointing this out to people who asked about a very special error which
appeared only in hacked copies (I'd have to research the wording, it
was great, just as his description of command com as a free command
processor sample from MS). Pampering of customers came later :-)

[E. S. Fabian]

Hello Klaus,

Post by Klaus Meinhard
Hallo Steve,

Post by E. S. Fabian
New versions just to generate new income? I don't think so. Upgrade
prices are not that much, and I guess few people pay for each
upgrade as it beomes available.

Obviously _you_ are not a salesman :-) The main reason for frequent
updates (versus error correction) is of course to generate a steady stream
of income. Rex has often stressed that his main body of customers are
institutions that buy bulk licenses, and these, after a program is
approved, buy every update.

Institutions also buy support plans, which in turn include free upgrades. I
agree that for personal use you do not need every upgrade, just as you do
not need every hardware or OS upgrade, either. I still use WinXP home on the
system on which I compose this post, and there are only a couple of features
in WinVista and Win7 I would use if it were available. OTOH I still use
programs which I bought (or inherited) for PC-DOS or Win3.1, including the
Microsoft Entertainment Pack, which Win7 does not support. Cf. IBM systems -
emulate decades old hardware.
...

Post by Klaus Meinhard
For most of that time 4DOS was shareware, without much limited
functionality. Serious copy protection started with perhaps version 6 of
4DOS, and even then there were hackz and crackz about to use it for free.
So there were many people who used the support forum, but never intended
to pay for the product. Mike had a very polite way of pointing this out to
people who asked about a very special error which appeared only in hacked
copies (I'd have to research the wording, it was great, just as his
description of command com as a free command processor sample from MS).
Pampering of customers came later :-)

Copy protection and cracking is an entirely different issue. Yes, I am aware
of another software package used for business calculations, whose
unauthorized use resulted in minor miscalculations.

Mike's description of "the free sample command processor" (COMMAND.COM) was
indeed ingenious, and he never had detractors of his technical competence
and knowledge. OTOH pampering customers is a good tool to STAY in business.