Once again, it's a workaround, it's not a solution -- the fact remains that 32-bit OD can't access 64-bit programs, that's what SD need to be working on.

I and other people wouldn't be complaining in this forum if ObjectDock worked bug-free and fully-compatible. Considering that it's not I don't see why people like me should stop voicing their frustration and disappointment.

I tend to go elsewhere if a product doesn't work as I expect it to and the developers doesn't listen. There are quite a few alternate docks you can use (few of them are actually better though).

Personally, I believe that they DO listen. But they have quite alot of work to do on all the software they're maintaining, and I don't expect them to resolv it all at once. Object Desktop is getting the main attention right now, and it'll likely remain that way for the next few months. I'm hoping they manage to sneak in an object dock beta in their schedule soon, but I'll not be surprised if we'll have to wait 'til first quarter 2010.

1. Have there been any official acknowledgement or feedback on the bugs and issues that I've reported? No.

3. It's not meant to. I learnt that if one doesn't complain then nothing gets done. I also learnt that complaining once and then waiting for cows to come home is not an effective strategy either. My posts should serve as a constant reminder that problems that are meant to be resolved have not been.

5. If a person posts in a thread about his problems with OD and Win 7 and I have a problem, then why can't I share my experience with that person? How do I know that person already read what I said? Either that or he/she should post in the main Bugs thread.

7. How do I know that they're working on? No feedback was given. Last update was months ago. It was said that once Impulse gets an update Stardock would work on OD, but we heard nothing about it, so I won't assume that they're working on bugs that I've mentioned.

It's not 64-bit compatible. Let's leave it at that. If it was 64-bit would have already been put on the product page. That workaround isn't a solution because it involves user intervention. A solution would be Stardock fixing it so OD could access apps in 64-bit System32 folder.

Not at the moment, because I have not upgraded to 64-bit Windows 7 yet. Will probably do it next weekend and let you of my experience then. In the meantime, there are plenty of Win 7 (and not just specific to that OS) bugs for SD to be busy with

Im running win7 x32 ultimate since tuesday  using od and havent encountered any probs whatsoever, my dock settings, drag to dock etc are as was in vista , would like to see more win7 icons though c,mon guys. Mr D. Arneaz this applies to you particularly

 I'm just going to STFU...about that...

Microsoft should put ALL backward compatibility into an optional installation package. I don't want it. Because it's installed as default, there's no real motivation for coders to create fully native software.

Well, yes...it actually NEEDS to be reactive and NOT proactive, as it is the MS coders and not Stardock who create and modify the OS.  Windows 7 may have been around for several months [I know I've been using it since about July on a permanent basis]...but what is deemed [By MS] as 'final' was/is the RTM which has not been out all that long.  Revisions [by MS] to the OS break things so that rather than play catch-up with the MS coders it is [as many developers do] more sensible to hold back until the OS goes Gold.

There's a very good reason for that.  In any bunch of 'users' you will find people who will not tolerate beta program failures/bugs and who will complain even more bitterly than the one or two voices crying "why isn't it out/supported yet?"

No, I don't, but others might.  Afterall not everyone is on the same page...all the time...

More often than not, Stardock limits access to betas to people who will be more willing to accept that what they are using IS a beta and thus may break things, mildly or 'dramatically'....such as Object Desktop Subscribers, people who typically have more exposure to and thus more experience with Stardock's range of software.

Skinners in particular tend to have more intimate knowledge and understanding of what to look for as an actual 'bug', as they are skinning for the program.  SD's software development has always benefitted from skinner-feedback in particular so the development is/remains in good hands...

Personally?

Acceptable?  Yes.

Desirable?  Maybe not.

I know of lots of programs which were released years ago....that functioned quite well...then....that do not now...and have had no further development either public or private.....all outside my control/influence...Sysmetrix is one.... Litestep [has always been one]....then there are literally HUNDREDS of other skinnable applications that have not seen renewal in years.

Would you like me to rattle them all off?

Whether or not Stardock releases revised versions...or limits possible beta testing to one group or another is all entirely outside my sphere of influence, and no amount of verbalising of frustration will likely make a huge difference.....unless perhaps it is from those who decide SD policy.

Now if end users are using a proggy, any proggy within an OS for which said proggy was not intended/developed then they should rightly expect "issues".

As for not officially being declared compatible with Windows 7 and/or 64bit that is clearly because there has been no released update of the proggy for X number of years....quite logical, really.

If attempts to use it on an unsupported OS fail or cause issues then I'd probably not use it.....

...until such time as there is an appropriate release...

See...there's the rub.

Years ago, when you purchased it...it worked, right?

Then time moved on...the OS changed....wasn't a 32bit of XP...suddenly it was a 64bit of Windows 7.

Is it the fault of the program that your OS is perhaps now incompatible?

The program didn't change your OS...