[Dominic Harr]

If the majority of people hadn't understood him you'd be correct. But the majority understood him fine.

Um, 2 people "understood" him, and both of those would argue the exact opposite of *anything* I said.

B2k even follows me to other, non-MS threads, taking the opposite side just to disagree with me.

In fact, it seems clear that everyone else took Jeeves' first comment at face value and believed it. I was the only one to ask for clarification. And it turned out I was right to.

You don't have to admit your error. I understand. It's kind of like thinking that any suggestion MS isn't perfect is an "insult".

Some people just have issues.

[discostu]

It's like pounding nails with my skull. I took it at face value too, and understood it completely. Nobody else has indicated any confusion on it. You're the only one giving any indication that you didn't get it. That's not his fault. if you'll look back at the original post is says change over costs are 60% of original development. Any way you slice it Jeeves' posts contradicts that info. Now how I calculate development costs is exactly how Jeeves did, from customer wish list to ship. The developments process, and therefore costs, do not start with coding and end with testing. it's the whole caboodle, spec, design, front end, back end, testing, and having the customer send you back to the drawing board because you didn't understand them (hopefully that happens right after spec if at all).

I'm not in error. How in blazes can understanding what someone said EVER be in error?! It can't. He said it, I understood it, no error. The error was on your part because your the one that misunderstood.