CompuServe Messages

I am having trouble following the logic of your message. Suppose, for example, that Lotus (of 1, 2,3 fame) decided to become active in developing (or even porting existing product to) for the Amiga. Certainly, Lotus can afford whatever fee is required to become a "Commercial Developer," and Commodore would certainly welcome them with open arms, even to the point of waiving some of the screening which you seem to be caught up in. Now, Lotus would have bought it's status as a Commercial Developer both with cash on the barrelhead, and use of it's corporate reputation. The minor detail of Lotus' reputation and experience being on a completely different platform would have nothing to do with anything. As a developer, Lotus would be "qualified" to test the operating system of the Amiga. My question is why should Lotus be considered more capable of testing a new operating system than John Smith, who has written dozens of PD and shareware programs for the Amiga but hasn't received enough in return to afford the fees to become a "Commercial Developer?" What has paying to go to college to do with being qualified to act as a physicist? Many technological breakthroughs throughout history have been made by folks who have not been to college. In fact, there are many people throughout industry functioning in, and considered qualified by their employers, professional areas who have not paid to go to college. They may have amassed knowledge through years of hands-on experience, self teaching, or even be childhood prodigies, but they are recognized as qualified to perform in their fields both by their employers and others in those fields. <continued>