Well, I feel a little more than chagrined. Last week, my most immediate boss sent me on a quest for a web browser plug-in capable of dishing out SQL Server Reporting Services reports, one that didn't depend on Microsoft Internet Explorer on the Windows platform.
After most of my many and varied incantations to The Almighty Google lead to dead-ends, I put the question to the mailing list where the local Linux illuminati visit. I also pinged the email addresses of two possible vendors.
Ideally, you're supposed to write so that you cannot possibly be misunderstood. Wow, did I ever fall short of the ideal in all three cases!
Looking back, my foremost mistake was obsessing about the technical requirements/restrictions without ever thinking to mention what, exactly, we're actually trying to do with the technology. A little context would have saved more than a little time and typing, particularly b/c one of the vendors lives sixteen or seventeen time zones away from me.
That being said, there is a glass ceiling of sorts to the afore-mentioned ideal. (Ideals are prone to that, I've noticed.) Without mentioning any names, I'm pretty convinced that one vendor did not entirely want to understand the requirements, or maybe figured that they were someone else's problem after the sale. When even a relatively clueless key-banger like myself has the feeling of being hustled, I think we can safely say that the product probably wouldn't cut it.
I'm not sure what penance tech. writers are supposed to do for their sins. I'll figure something out. In the meantime, though, I thought I'd pass along the lessons learned, to hopefully spare others the wasted time and bad karma.
