#Multi-tasking Computers
12-May-88 15:01:13
Sb: #123903-#Multi-tasking Computers
Fm: David Kieltyka 73200,3553
To: Henry Colonna 74726,3216
This message turned up in search, but its forum couldn’t be identified from the original transcript, so it may not be linked into its thread.
I don't think it's my responsibility to revere any software company. In
my time as an Amigaphile (or should it be Amigan?) I have discovered
absolutely *no* software houses worthy of my un- guarded loyalty. I praise
'em when they do good, and flame 'em when they screw up. Sure, EA has done
alot for the Amiga community with their early and continued support of the
machine. They deserve kudos for that. More power to 'em. But that
doesn't stop me from turning on the gas jets when I feel they deserve it.
There is no conspiracy here against EA. EA is bound to receive more
criticism than most other companies simply because they market such a large
volume of Amiga software. More titles means more complaints. The downside
of greater visibility is that you present a bigger target to potential
flamethrowers.
Another factor to toss into the mix is this: anti-copy-protection
[and, seemingly–but not really–conversely, anti-piracy] sentiment
on this forum is very strong, and for very good reasons.
1) Copy-protection doesn't protect anything. Period.
2) Copy-protection often interferes with streamlined, fluid use
of the Amiga's multitasking OS. I lose more in decreased
productivity than I gain in gaming enjoyment by rebooting my
system with so-and-so's latest whiz-bang, copy-protected,
singletasking effort.
Any software firm that consistently employs system-crippling CP
methods–EA for example–is bound (and deserves) to get repeatedly
slammed. The aim of such criticism isn't us getting our rocks off
with cynical, holier-than-thou, aren't-we-enlightened smugness. Nor
is it indulging in smear campaigns or personal vendettas against
specific companies. The aim is convincing said software firms to
change their CP policies. Perhaps the slamming isn't always con-
structive, but I think it's nearly always intended to be.
I hope this hasn't sounded like a "Shut up, Henry!" message, 'cuz it
isn't. I just think you haven't been giving Ben and Larry a fair shake.
Sure, they'll cut down a product or a company if they think it deserves
cutting down. That's their right, just as it's your right to take issue.
But, on the other hand, they're also quick to give something or someone a
plug if they think such is merited or deserved. Anyway, that's my five
cents (the cost of comments went up along with postage) worth.