Persuade manufacturers to improve software? Thoughts?

[khirth]

Let's assume one's budget is defined and limited. Also that the new instrument has been purchased, delivered and passes specifications. Then one begins the discovery phase of all the little things in the software we can generally refer to as unadvertised "features." If you are not the biggest fish in the sea (i.e. not likely to expend gobs of $ in the very near future), and your instrument is not the latest and greatest (i.e. not going to win the next award for innovation), how does one effectively persuade instrument manufactuers to continue to devote resources, which are admittedly limited for us all, to improving software on the instrumentation currently out in the field?

Sure would like to know what has worked for others.

[CE Instruments]

Sure would like to know what has worked for others

Someone has suceeeded

As a general rule the only way manufacturers will invest in software mods is if they get a huge amount of feedback from the users regarding the need for a feature and the manufacturer is convinced it will generate income

No software is perfect for everyone and each feature patched in can cause other problems. Then the PC/OS changes and the manufacturer starts again.

If you have an issue with a particular software post it here. You might be lucky and find someone knows a third party add-on or even a way round your issue

[ravenwork]

This issue seems to me to be one of the many good arguments in favor of open source code policy.

Surely, this would be win-win for all concerned.

Instrument makers would still able to sell their latest and greatest versions of the software, since they hold all the development cards. The rest of us could make incremental improvements in support of our still functional instrumentation.