CompuServe Messages

We really should this one go to rest, but… We're using the name HotLinks for a system which matches exactly what the term means on other platforms. We don't really see HotLinks as a product, but as a system level thing. It's really something CBM should do, not us, but since they don't have the manpower and were not likely to do it this century, we did it instead. Maybe at some point they will pick it up from us, but until then we have to sell it. We thought about calling it other things, but it is hotlinks on other platforms so why make up new terms for the same thing? (OLE and DDE or whatever they are on Windows are obviously more confusing than just using hotlinks like the mac does.) Our HotLinks is modelled after the Mac's, but is actually better. HotLinks network will pick up where their development team left off and will go far beyond their conception of hotlinks. All we are trying to say is that we are using hotlinks as a name for something that is known as hotlinks. If GD was selling a functionally equivalent system than that would be fine, but they have just one aspect of hotlinks in their products. That's like us selling a dtp without being able to import graphics. We could call it a dtp but it wouldn't be one. It's the same for hotlinks. Just picking one feature of hotlinks and saying it's hotlinks just confuses the public, and they're confused enough about hotlinks as it is. As time goes on it won't be an issue. Users will just buy HotLinks and will double click on install. They'll never think about it again, and since more and more programs will have it on their menus, it will become second nature. BTW, we just go another company committed to adding HL to their products. Three companies now have products with HL due out this year, two of them very soon. Michael Soft-Logik