I do agree that they're out of date, but that wasn't their point, their software somehow doesn't like the NASes, so they had to look into where the problem was. But, their first thought was "let's tell them they're no good and tell them which ones to buy so we wouldn't have to look at the code".

[–] Ziglin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That sounds extremely lazy. I'd expect more from a dev team.

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Me too, but apparently, that wasn't the case.

My reasoning was, they'd have to send someone over to do tests and build the project on site, install and test, since we couldn't give any of those NASes to them for them to work on the problem, and they'd rather not do that, since it's a lot more work and it's time consuming.

[–] Ziglin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Couldn't they remotely connect to them?

[–] 0x4E4F@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yeah, they tried that a few times, the software would glitch and Windows would either BSOD or just freeze (had something to do with how their HASP dongle license communicated with the software and the drivers it used, nothing to do with our issue whatsoever, lol). In the end, they had to come down and debug the issue on a separate rig and install. We just couldn't have those interruptions in production.