CompuServe Thread

#Superbase Professional

4 messages in this thread
#50624From: Peter GanczarskiJan 24, 1987 10:58 PM
Hi – I know what you mean. I have used the 64 version of Superbase and was very pleased with it, so as soon as my dealer got the Amiga version I bought it. Well now I know to look (and use before I leap. I am very very diasappointed by the missing programability. My 64 vers. does more and cost only 2/3 as much. Well I wait for a couple months and if offered at a reasonable cost get the upgrade. Otherwise I have a costly paperweight. I think they should clearly mark on the box " This personal version is lacking prog. language.". I can't believe they would be dense enough not to think this ability was important. In by book this move wipes out my opinion of them ( high) based on previous products. By the way I have also had some trouble getting it to run. With the dongle in place I keep getting software error- task held messages and can't even get past defining a new file. However if I boot up without the dongle ( and keep it out) I have no problems. Has this happened to anyone else ? regards, P. Ganczarski
#50696From: Claude J. GoschJan 25, 1987 10:23 AM
The dongle is a protection device, and should ALLOW the program to work when it is in port 2, and PREVENT using the program when it is missing. Yours seems to work backwords! My Superbase works fine with the dongle installed. I haven't tried it without installing the dongle. I've heard that Marauder II will make a "backup" copy of Superbase that doesn't require the dongle, but I wouldn't think the program would refuse to run with it installed. I'm going to write to Progressive Peripherals about their false advertising. Their ad in Amazing Computing was for Superbase Personal, made no mention of the professional version, and listed the programming capability as a feature of Superbase Personal. That's FRAUD any way you look at it!
#50786From: Peter GanczarskiJan 25, 1987 5:39 PM
Thanks for the reply. I geuss I failed to mention it but my backup was made with maurader II. However as you say that shouldn't cause a conflict with the thingusin place. I'll have to do more testing when I have the time, but it isn't to high on my list of things to do because of my lack of enthusiasm. Thanks Peter Ganczarski
#50917From: Dave Haynie/C128 LandJan 26, 1987 5:19 AM
Peter, If Marauder 'removed' the protection by substituting the constants for and empty mouse port but left the code in that checks the port, then the program would proably have 'inverse protection' ie: will only run when port 2 looks empty. best regards, Rick Sterling, CBM Senior Test Eng.