R# 3.0 Upgrade Price Whiners -- Please Read

Dear Whiners,

There are three running themes to those people who believe the price of a 3.0 upgrade is unjustified.

1) R# is so unstable you should give it to us for free because we've had to smell your crap for this long.

2) I just go through paying $150 for a personal version, and now you want me to pay for an upgrade 6 months later.

3) There aren't enough changes in 3.0 to justify it being a full version release for c# users, and since I won't be using VB.net, then I won't want the few features that made it in for us "real" programmers.

To those I give my two cents --

I understand your frustration with the 2.5.x version and the decision to make users pay for the upgrade to 3, but honestly -- some R# users (myself being one) haven't had to pay for upgrades since 1.5, and only paid 99$ then. About the instabilities of 2.5.2, I am not sure what problems you people are having, but I don't, and imagine a large portion of the R# community do not have those issues. I do have one nagging one (the exception on solution close), but I think that's hardly a reason for you guys to be so pessimistic. If you haven't downloaded and played with 3.0, then yes you probably would think "there are hardly any noticable updates", but I beg to differ.

3.0 is not just simply a re-hashed bug-fixed 2.5, there are significant improvements in coding suggestions, different levels of warnings for code inspection (suggestion vs. warning). There are a considerable number of new suggestions, the new code formatter, better XML support (and yes, VB.NET, though I personally won't use it)...

Todo Explorer, the Navigate to Symbol, Refactorings like Replace Constructor with Factory method, Find Referenced Code (not just find usages, but the other way around!), the Unit Test Explorer.

I promise I'm not a paid JetBrains hack, but I believe in this stuff, and I know it has been very useful to me.

I guess what it comes down to for me is -- JetBrains has never said "free upgrades for life", unlike other notable companies who have had to renig on their promises (We're looking at you WinZip and SiteDesigner!), but instead have been gracious enough to provide its users with a great product (even if its in development most of the time) for a great value. First Version 1.5, then 2.0, then 2.5... That is like getting a 2005 car, then the company giving you a 2006 and a 2007, while they all may have their own quirks and shortcomings, that does not give you the right to expect a 2008 for free.

I guess what I'm saying is quit whining. There are plenty of products on the market, and for you to whine about a $150 upgrade is pretty rediculous. And if you think the grass is greener (more stable) on the other side, feel free to give it a whirl, and I suspect you will find it not only just as unstable, but limiting as well.

Just my 2C worth.

Ciao

23 comments

Agreed - and I'm not complaining - I'm going to pay.

Some users might find that exceptions have been related to 3rd party plug-ins.

Cheers,

Stuart

Chadwick Posey wrote:

Dear Whiners,

There are three running themes to those people who believe the price of a 3.0 upgrade is unjustified.

1) R# is so unstable you should give it to us for free because we've had to smell your crap for this long.

2) I just go through paying $150 for a personal version, and now you want me to pay for an upgrade 6 months later.

3) There aren't enough changes in 3.0 to justify it being a full version release for c# users, and since I won't be using VB.net, then I won't want the few features that made it in for us "real" programmers.

To those I give my two cents --

I understand your frustration with the 2.5.x version and the decision to make users pay for the upgrade to 3, but honestly -- some R# users (myself being one) haven't had to pay for upgrades since 1.5, and only paid 99$ then. About the instabilities of 2.5.2, I am not sure what problems you people are having, but I don't, and imagine a large portion of the R# community do not have those issues. I do have one nagging one (the exception on solution close), but I think that's hardly a reason for you guys to be so pessimistic. If you haven't downloaded and played with 3.0, then yes you probably would think "there are hardly any noticable updates", but I beg to differ.

3.0 is not just simply a re-hashed bug-fixed 2.5, there are significant improvements in coding suggestions, different levels of warnings for code inspection (suggestion vs. warning). There are a considerable number of new suggestions, the new code formatter, better XML support (and yes, VB.NET, though I personally won't use it)...

Todo Explorer, the Navigate to Symbol, Refactorings like Replace Constructor with Factory method, Find Referenced Code (not just find usages, but the other way around!), the Unit Test Explorer.

I promise I'm not a paid JetBrains hack, but I believe in this stuff, and I know it has been very useful to me.

I guess what it comes down to for me is -- JetBrains has never said "free upgrades for life", unlike other notable companies who have had to renig on their promises (We're looking at you WinZip and SiteDesigner!), but instead have been gracious enough to provide its users with a great product (even if its in development most of the time) for a great value. First Version 1.5, then 2.0, then 2.5... That is like getting a 2005 car, then the company giving you a 2006 and a 2007, while they all may have their own quirks and shortcomings, that does not give you the right to expect a 2008 for free.

I guess what I'm saying is quit whining. There are plenty of products on the market, and for you to whine about a $150 upgrade is pretty rediculous. And if you think the grass is greener (more stable) on the other side, feel free to give it a whirl, and I suspect you will find it not only just as unstable, but limiting as well.

Just my 2C worth.

Ciao

0

Chadwick,

With all due respect, your flamebait is /. worthy (then again, you work at Gartner, so should I really expect anything more?)

All I've been asking for is a consistent, clearly stated policy so those of us who came on board 6 months ago can understand why we have to pay up again, since:

A) the product, as wonderful as it is, is still not the most stable product out there.

B) many folks have gotten 3 years out of it gratis.

C) 3.0 was clearly on the horizon (and in the works) 6 months ago, why not post the pricing policy?

Anyway, feel free to continue this in the non-inflamatory pricing thread.

Cheers,
Giorgio

0

I went back and read some of what I wrote again, and I suppose it was somewhat inflammatory, and for that I apologize. I just think that Resharper offers incredible value for the dollar they charge and that is even after factoring in the short comings.

Don't take my comments to mean that I think that Resharper is perfect. Quite the contrary, its incredibly bloated, and requires a cavernous amount of memory, and is almost as unstable as Manson on crack. I still am amazed when I shut it off (for varying reasons) how much faster VS runs without it.

But even with those problems, I inevitably turn R# back on, because I miss Alt-Inserting, Ctrl-Clicking and Alt-Entering my way to faster code.

I apologize to everyone I offended with the thread, I just feel very strongly about the value R# offers, and just get tired of what I feel is whining about problems that most software has (See Vista for a good example).

But I suppose just because its minor to me, doesn't make it minor to you.

My apologies Giorgio et al.

Ciao

0

I am one of those so called "whiners". Just 4 months ago, I purchased 3
copies of Resharper for a pilot program for my developnment team. We started
with 2.5 but quickly moved over to the 3.0 EAP version due to the 2.5
version being so unstable. Did the 2.5 version work. Sure. You could use it
for a couple of hours before it would either slow to a crawl, start throwing
error messages or just crash VS 2005. You learned to restart VS every few
hours. I do not expect upgrades for free but I do expect a reasonable
warranty period on a product and expect when a version contains significant
bugs, the company should feel an obligation to provide upgrades to a stable
version, even if that version is from one major version to another major
version. I would even be agreeable to a staged fee: Free within 3 months,
$49 within 6 months, $99 within 12 months, etc. As it stands now, I have
uninstalled the product from all of the pilot computers and will not be
moving forward on purchasing the product for my team until they solve the
stability issues. I will not be upgrading the 3 copies unless they have an
upgrade policy I feel is fair.

Bob

P.S. And yes, your posting was flameworthy - but I didn't take it personal.
:)

"Chadwick Posey" <chadwick.posey@gartner.com> wrote in message
news:27115476.1181052252787.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...

Dear Whiners,

>

There are three running themes to those people who believe the price of a
3.0 upgrade is unjustified.

>

1) R# is so unstable you should give it to us for free because we've had
to smell your crap for this long.

>

2) I just go through paying $150 for a personal version, and now you want
me to pay for an upgrade 6 months later.

>

3) There aren't enough changes in 3.0 to justify it being a full version
release for c# users, and since I won't be using VB.net, then I won't want
the few features that made it in for us "real" programmers.

>

To those I give my two cents --

>

I understand your frustration with the 2.5.x version and the decision to
make users pay for the upgrade to 3, but honestly -- some R# users (myself
being one) haven't had to pay for upgrades since 1.5, and only paid 99$
then. About the instabilities of 2.5.2, I am not sure what problems you
people are having, but I don't, and imagine a large portion of the R#
community do not have those issues. I do have one nagging one (the
exception on solution close), but I think that's hardly a reason for you
guys to be so pessimistic. If you haven't downloaded and played with 3.0,
then yes you probably would think "there are hardly any noticable
updates", but I beg to differ.

>

3.0 is not just simply a re-hashed bug-fixed 2.5, there are significant
improvements in coding suggestions, different levels of warnings for code
inspection (suggestion vs. warning). There are a considerable number of
new suggestions, the new code formatter, better XML support (and yes,
VB.NET, though I personally won't use it)...

>

Todo Explorer, the Navigate to Symbol, Refactorings like Replace
Constructor with Factory method, Find Referenced Code (not just find
usages, but the other way around!), the Unit Test Explorer.

>

I promise I'm not a paid JetBrains hack, but I believe in this stuff, and
I know it has been very useful to me.

>

I guess what it comes down to for me is -- JetBrains has never said "free
upgrades for life", unlike other notable companies who have had to renig
on their promises (We're looking at you WinZip and SiteDesigner!), but
instead have been gracious enough to provide its users with a great
product (even if its in development most of the time) for a great value.
First Version 1.5, then 2.0, then 2.5... That is like getting a 2005 car,
then the company giving you a 2006 and a 2007, while they all may have
their own quirks and shortcomings, that does not give you the right to
expect a 2008 for free.

>

I guess what I'm saying is quit whining. There are plenty of products on
the market, and for you to whine about a $150 upgrade is pretty
rediculous. And if you think the grass is greener (more stable) on the
other side, feel free to give it a whirl, and I suspect you will find it
not only just as unstable, but limiting as well.

>

Just my 2C worth.

>

Ciao



0

Well said Bob. A staged pricing scheme would seem fair to me.

-Giorgio

0

"Bob Vandehey" <bvandehey@orcc.com> wrote in message
news:f47db3$ct0$1@is.intellij.net...
>I am one of those so called "whiners". Just 4 months ago, I purchased 3
>copies of Resharper for a pilot program for my developnment team. We
>started with 2.5 but quickly moved over to the 3.0 EAP version due to the
>2.5 version being so unstable.

Just out of curiosity: did you try the 2.5.2 version?

John


0

Yes. I did use that version. It had stability issues. You learned to save
often. Granted, our projects are probably on the extreme side. Our solutions
have dozens of projects with hundreds of thousand lines of code.

"John Saunders" <john.saunders@trizetto.com> wrote in message
news:f47h8l$gi7$1@is.intellij.net...

"Bob Vandehey" <bvandehey@orcc.com> wrote in message
news:f47db3$ct0$1@is.intellij.net...

>>I am one of those so called "whiners". Just 4 months ago, I purchased 3
>>copies of Resharper for a pilot program for my developnment team. We
>>started with 2.5 but quickly moved over to the 3.0 EAP version due to the
>>2.5 version being so unstable.
>

Just out of curiosity: did you try the 2.5.2 version?

>

John

>



0

Granted, our projects are probably on the extreme side. Our solutions

have dozens of projects with hundreds of thousand lines of code.

I don't know how "extreme" and uncommon your type of solutions are - at one point (before splitting them up into 40-project sized solutions), we reached a high of 120 projects in 1 solution.

That aside, I still see instability in 4 project solutions, so I don't think the problems we experience are specific to large solutions, they simply occur more often.

I'm glad to see I'm not the only "whiner" ;)

0

Well that's good to hear. I didn't think we were that out of the ordinary
but with everyone making me feel like our experience was extraordinary, I
thought maybe that might be the case.

"Giorgio Galante" <giorgio@giorgiogalante.com> wrote in message
news:30310813.1181177094978.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...
>> Granted, our projects are probably on the extreme side. Our solutions

have dozens of projects with hundreds of thousand lines of code.

>

I don't know how "extreme" and uncommon your type of solutions are - at
one point (before splitting them up into 40-project sized solutions), we
reached a high of 120 projects in 1 solution.

>

That aside, I still see instability in 4 project solutions, so I don't
think the problems we experience are specific to large solutions, they
simply occur more often.

>

I'm glad to see I'm not the only "whiner" ;)



0

"Bob Vandehey" <bvandehey@orcc.com> wrote in message
news:f47jl4$dud$1@is.intellij.net...

Yes. I did use that version. It had stability issues. You learned to save
often. Granted, our projects are probably on the extreme side. Our
solutions have dozens of projects with hundreds of thousand lines of code.


Thanks, Bob, I ask because I saw serious problems with 2.5 (ASP.NET,
strongly-typed DataSets), but am not seeing many problems now. I usually use
a solution with 18 projects, including a largish ASP.NET application.

I now seem to switch between two exceptions ("modification cookie" and "out
of memory"), but only after long development sessions. Nowadays, I usually
wait until I've had two exceptions, then restart Visual Studio. That is only
happening every couple of days or so.
--
John


0

As far as I can tell, ReSharper's memory usage has less to do with the size
of the project than with the number of objects (properties, methods,
enumerations) it has to track. I say this because I've noticed ReSharper
seems to work well when handling "large" projects (10,000+ lines) containing
relatively few public items, but fall flat on its face when handling a
somewhat small project (4,000 lines) with a lot of public objects. The
smaller project is very poor code that contains roughly 3,000 enum-defined
array items in six arrays and pretty much everything is defined public. I
can create a new (empty) project, paste in just these public members, and
watch ReSharper's memory skyrocket.

I can't say this is all ReSharper's fault, though, because the usage trees
of these members are huge and require a lot of memory to store. I'm current
refactoring all these enumerated values into a strongly-typed collection
that should significantly reduce the footprint, but I do wish ReSharper
would remain stable to allow me to use it to refactor most of this code.
What I find odd is that I can open the project, go to bed (e.g. just let
Visual Studio sit idle overnight), and in the morning ReSharper's memory
usage has climbed significantly. This may be because ReSharper is
continually building usage trees in the background, but this is speculation.

--


"Giorgio Galante" <giorgio@giorgiogalante.com> wrote in message
news:30310813.1181177094978.JavaMail.itn@is.intellij.net...
>> Granted, our projects are probably on the extreme side. Our solutions

have dozens of projects with hundreds of thousand lines of code.

>

I don't know how "extreme" and uncommon your type of solutions are - at
one point (before splitting them up into 40-project sized solutions), we
reached a high of 120 projects in 1 solution.

>

That aside, I still see instability in 4 project solutions, so I don't
think the problems we experience are specific to large solutions, they
simply occur more often.

>

I'm glad to see I'm not the only "whiner" ;)



0

Hello Lothan,

Can we have these "public members", which brings ReSharper to its knees when
pasted into new project? You can send them directly to me at orangy at jetbrains
dot com. This really can help make ReSharper better! Thanks in advance.

Sincerely,
Ilya Ryzhenkov

JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


L> As far as I can tell, ReSharper's memory usage has less to do with
L> the size of the project than with the number of objects (properties,
L> methods, enumerations) it has to track. I say this because I've
L> noticed ReSharper seems to work well when handling "large" projects
L> (10,000+ lines) containing relatively few public items, but fall flat
L> on its face when handling a somewhat small project (4,000 lines) with
L> a lot of public objects. The smaller project is very poor code that
L> contains roughly 3,000 enum-defined array items in six arrays and
L> pretty much everything is defined public. I can create a new (empty)
L> project, paste in just these public members, and watch ReSharper's
L> memory skyrocket.
L>
L> I can't say this is all ReSharper's fault, though, because the usage
L> trees of these members are huge and require a lot of memory to store.
L> I'm current refactoring all these enumerated values into a
L> strongly-typed collection that should significantly reduce the
L> footprint, but I do wish ReSharper would remain stable to allow me to
L> use it to refactor most of this code. What I find odd is that I can
L> open the project, go to bed (e.g. just let Visual Studio sit idle
L> overnight), and in the morning ReSharper's memory usage has climbed
L> significantly. This may be because ReSharper is continually building
L> usage trees in the background, but this is speculation.
L>


0

I've experienced some of the same issues with memory usage, but I don't think its really R#'s fault -- the new Garbage Collect command on the memory usage in 3.0 typically cuts the mem usage in half for me after only using R# for an hour or two.


I don't know what that means, but I suspect that the GC itself may be partially to blame. Maybe we could get a feature that R# can "force a GC Collect after x minutes" or through a setting we can tell it to "auto-force GC when memory gets above X MB" (Sort of like IIS6's app pool thresholds)?

0

I just sent you the entire project as a 35K ZIP file.

--


"Ilya Ryzhenkov" <orangy@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:9f6b3e2913c6c08c977dcf14d5780@news.intellij.net...

Hello Lothan,

>

Can we have these "public members", which brings ReSharper to its knees
when pasted into new project? You can send them directly to me at orangy
at jetbrains dot com. This really can help make ReSharper better! Thanks
in advance.

>

Sincerely,
Ilya Ryzhenkov

>

JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>
>

L> As far as I can tell, ReSharper's memory usage has less to do with
L> the size of the project than with the number of objects (properties,
L> methods, enumerations) it has to track. I say this because I've
L> noticed ReSharper seems to work well when handling "large" projects
L> (10,000+ lines) containing relatively few public items, but fall flat
L> on its face when handling a somewhat small project (4,000 lines) with
L> a lot of public objects. The smaller project is very poor code that
L> contains roughly 3,000 enum-defined array items in six arrays and
L> pretty much everything is defined public. I can create a new (empty)
L> project, paste in just these public members, and watch ReSharper's
L> memory skyrocket.
L> L> I can't say this is all ReSharper's fault, though, because the usage
L> trees of these members are huge and require a lot of memory to store.
L> I'm current refactoring all these enumerated values into a
L> strongly-typed collection that should significantly reduce the
L> footprint, but I do wish ReSharper would remain stable to allow me to
L> use it to refactor most of this code. What I find odd is that I can
L> open the project, go to bed (e.g. just let Visual Studio sit idle
L> overnight), and in the morning ReSharper's memory usage has climbed
L> significantly. This may be because ReSharper is continually building
L> usage trees in the background, but this is speculation.
L>



0

The new Garbage Collect command on the memory usage in 3.0 typically
cuts the mem usage in half for me after only using R# for an hour or
two.


Where can I find this command?


0

Hello flipdoubt,

ReSharper | Options | Environment | General - "Show managed memory usage
in status bar" should be checked.
Find memory indicator on the right side of status bar and right-click it.

Sincerely,
Ilya Ryzhenkov

JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


>> The new Garbage Collect command on the memory usage in 3.0 typically
>> cuts the mem usage in half for me after only using R# for an hour or
>> two.
>>
f> Where can I find this command?
f>


0

Hello,

I've experienced some of the same issues with memory usage, but I
don't think its really R#'s fault -- the new Garbage Collect command
on the memory usage in 3.0 typically cuts the mem usage in half for me
after only using R# for an hour or two.


So it cuts the memory usage, but what about the performance? These two things
are related, but not so directly.

I don't know what that means, but I suspect that the GC itself may be
partially to blame. Maybe we could get a feature that R# can "force a
GC Collect after x minutes" or through a setting we can tell it to
"auto-force GC when memory gets above X MB" (Sort of like IIS6's app
pool thresholds)?


This X would vary for environments, solutions and so on. Also, playing with
GC blindly is more likely to impair the performance than improve it. If you
find that it helps, however, you could force the collection with a simple
VS add-in, or a R# plugin, because it isn't any special R# pool, but rather
the .NET's memory pool of the Visual Studio process, so it doesn't matter
who triggers the GC. As for the R# itself, this feature seems too dangerous,
and its benefits too unclear, for it to get into the trunk.


Serge Baltic
JetBrains, Inc — http://www.jetbrains.com
“Develop with pleasure!”


0

I think the main reason why I feel this is an unfair upgrade is a combination of 1) and 3). Basically, when I pay for a product, I expect it to work and work well. If I get a version that works, but not very well and then, some time later, a version that works well, I do not consider that an "upgrade". I consider it a bug-fix release and yes, I expect it to be free, because that is what I paid for in the first place.

The argument that 3.0 has some new features for C# users is irrelevant here. Maybe I don't want those features - I don' t know yet - but I definitely want a ReSharper version that just works. So by all means release a version with new features, but also fix the problems in 2.5, at no charge. Then you can honestly tell your users that nobody is forcing them to upgrade. "If you want the extra features in 3.0 then here's what it will cost you, if you don't - that's fine, stick with 2.5."

0

It's unfortunate that JetBrains has such a vague release pricing policy. It evident across multiple product lines. I was looking at TeamCity (which looks pretty interesting) and noticed version 3.0 has been announced and then noticed in KIR's blog entry: "It is also not decided yet, whether you’ll have to pay for the upgrade."

Sorry, I won't even bother downloading the evaluation of the product until that information is made crystal clear. There's no sense in me feeling screwed over twice.

0

I sent an email to sales@jetbrains.com asking if they planned to introduced staged pricing:

I bought my (personal) licence in January, but if I had bought it in in April, I would have a
free upgrade. Do you have any plans for reduced pricing for those who bought their
licence so recently?

I'm not sure I can justify (to myself) paying so much for an upgrade when I'm only really
interested in the bug fixes.


That was on the 26th of June and I've had no response, so I'm guessing that means no.

0

I can take this even a step further. Here is the entire email thread between myself and JetBrains regarding the 3.0 upgrade: NOTE: Brian Noll never sent me another email nor did he reply to either of the two additional emails that I sent him (that were left out here).

$199 is NOT an upgrade... that's the full price!

- William Bloodworth

-


Original Message -


Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available
From: "Brian Noll - US Ops" <sales.us@jetbrains.com>
Date: Thu, July 05, 2007 10:15 am
To: William Bloodworth, "'Support - Andrey Serebryansky'"
<support@jetbrains.com>


Hi William,
I believe Andrey was mislead by your comment on May 30th stating you purchased ReSharper only a few weeks before (when it was 4 months). He took you for your word and didn’t double-check in the system. I’ll see what I can do for you.
Brian Noll
North American Operations- JetBrains
609 714 7883 voice
609 714 7886 fax

"develop with pleasure"




From: William Bloodworth
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:06 AM
To: 'Support - Andrey Serebryansky'
Cc: sales.us@jetbrains.com; busdev@jetbrains.com
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Andrey,

This is exactly the reason I asked BEFORE installing 3.0. And you specifically told me that I was entitled to an upgrade!

Now I have to take a long time to uninstall 3.0, reinstall 2.5, and then try to get all my shortcuts and colors back the way they were. It's a major pain in the ass and I wouldn't have installed 3.0 at all if you would have told me that the upgrade license was not available to me... when I asked you that question in the first place.

I have had nothing but great things to say to other engineers in our office and even convinced two of them to purchase ReSharper for themselves. I will no longer even mention ReSharper to any developers and if I hear others talking about it, I will be showing them a copy of this email so that they can see just how the JetBrains Customer Service truly treats their customers.

Sincerely,

William Bloodworth
Park Imaging
972.345.0320

-


Original Message-----
From: Support - Andrey Serebryansky
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 6:03 AM
To: William Bloodworth
Cc: support@jetbrains.com
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Hello William
I'm really sorry, but from the license e-mail stems that you have
purchased ReSharper on 27th January which is really too far from the date
when we started the 'Buy ReSharper 2.5 and get ReSharper 3.0 for free'
program, so your license won't work with the new version. Thank you!

Andrey Serebryansky
Support Engineer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

-


Original Message-----
From: William Bloodworth
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 6:48 PM
To: 'Support - Andrey Serebryansky'
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Sure... here is a copy of the original email:

IMPORTANT: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THE RIGHT TO USE THE JETBRAINS SOFTWARE PRODUCT, GRANTED BY JETBRAINS S.R.O. UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LICENSE AGREEMENT INCLUDED WITH THE SOFTWARE. PLEASE SAVE A COPY OF THIS EMAIL FOR FUTURE REFERENCES. ========LICENSE DETAILS======== Type: New User Reference No*: ]]>
Date of Issue: 26 January 2007
Number of Licensed Users: 1

  • Please quote this reference in any correspondence sent to JetBrains


============LICENSEE============

Name: William Bloodworth
Customer ID: Address: ========SOFTWARE PRODUCT======== Product Name: ReSharper Licensed Version: 2.5 Media: Electronic. The software is available for download from: http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/download/ ==========INSTALLATION========== Run the software and follow the Installation Wizard's instructions. To access the software, enter the User Name and a license key into the registration dialog: User Name: William Bloodworth License Key 1: ===DOCUMENTATION AND SUPPORT=== Documentation: http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/documentation/ FAQ and Knowledge Base: http://www.jetbrains.com/support/resharper/ Get developer and community assistance in our newsgroups at: news://news.jetbrains.com/jetbrains.resharper.community Bug-fix releases for licensed versions of the software are free of charge. To check for the availability of these releases, please visit http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper If you have any specific sales related questions, please contact sales.resharper@jetbrains.com Best regards, Sales Team JetBrains Inc http://www.jetbrains.com "Develop with pleasure!" ]]>

-


Original Message-----
From: Support - Andrey Serebryansky
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 6:42 AM
To: William Bloodworth
Cc: support@jetbrains.com
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Hello William
Could you please send us the original ReSharper 2.5 licence e-mail
which you received after purchase? Thank you!

Andrey Serebryansky
Support Engineer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

-


Original Message-----
From: William Bloodworth
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 11:15 PM
To: 'Support - Andrey Serebryansky'
Cc: paul@jetbrains.com
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Dear Andrey:

I have installed ReSharper 3.0 but my 2.5.2 license key does not unlock it.
What do I need to do in order to correctly register version 3.0?

Thank you,

- William Bloodworth

-


Original Message-----
From: Support - Andrey Serebryansky
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 4:43 AM
To: William Bloodworth
Cc: paul@jetbrains.com; support@jetbrains.com
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Hello William
You're right, you're entitled to the free upgrade to ReSharper 3.0,
but the Beta version doesn't support it yet. The release version of
ReSharper 3.0 will be able to accept your license key. Is the 'Free
Evaluation' option enabled in the 'License Information' dialog? Thank you!

Andrey Serebryansky
Support Engineer
JetBrains, Inc
http://www.jetbrains.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

________________________________

From: William Bloodworth
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:37 PM
To: 'JetBrains Team'
Subject: RE: ReSharper 3.0 Beta Available

Dear JetBrains:

I purchased ReSharper a few weeks ago but my key code does not work with the
3.0 Beta version.

This is an excerpt from the email you sent out.

  • Buy ReSharper 2.5.2 NOW and upgrade to version 3.0 when it's out for FREE


Therefore, shouldn't I receive a key for 3.0 as well?

Thank you,

- William Bloodworth

0

Please sign in to leave a comment.