Talk:BoundsChecker

Disclosure

I work for Micro Focus, and am one of the developers charged with caring for DevPartner Studio and BoundsChecker. Recognizing this, and trying to avoid this page appearing like a mere advertisement for our product, I have attempted to keep my commentary limited, strictly to the facts and fair to the point that my employers may not be entirely happy with me. The product is useful and good, but far from perfect. I am not updating Wikipedia at their request, but on my own. --Rpapo (talk) 23:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Criticisms reference

From my user talk page... -- Beland (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

You tagged the section about criticisms for references, but apart from telling you that I am the main developer taking care of the product right now, I can only say that it is a distillation of the complaints we get from our customers. It's not like anybody cares to review the product publicly anymore. I put the section in for the sake of even-handedness. I don't want the article to sound like an advertisement for the product. --Rpapo (talk) 23:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, Wikipedia:No original research requires published sources for such claims, especially since they could be considered libel. It would be good to find a published source for these claims, though this is a bit of a weird case and I'm not inclined to just remove the content. -- Beland (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Whatever. I put them in for balance, and to "set expectations", though I can understand where you/Wikipedia are coming from, especially when the comments could very well have come from one of our competitors . . . in which case (if they were unfounded), they could indeed be considered libel. Anybody having the product in their hands, however, could very quickly verify my comments. The product works, and accomplishes much, but it is not perfect and there is a non-monetary cost associated with the benefits. All measuring tools intrude on what they measure. --Rpapo (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)