JR North wrote:
This is an example of poor thought process. Why should you even need a
software update, even if it's readilly available, in order to make a
retail product perform correctly, the way it's supposed to, and think
this is an OK way to address poor quality control? It's one thing for
a software update to improve fuctionality, or add new functions or
features, expand a database, etc. It's quite another to have one to
correct a functional defect the product should in no way have in the
first place. Has the company paid you to beta test it's product?
JR

I think it's better to have the ability to upgrade software
than not. In an ideal world it would be unnecessary but
everything of more than trivial complexity has flaws. I've
spent the last year and a half adapting to new (cheaper) EDA
CAD tools and the vendor definitely should be paying me
extra to beta test. I'm torn between refunding half my
salary for reduced productivity and demanding a big raise
for the added aggravation.