#C/AllocMem()
23 messages in this thread
Kelly,
Apparently, at some point in time, CBM finally sent the
registration cards to Lattice (yes…registration cards went to CBM
originally). I say this because that's when Lattice sent me a notice
saying they had just received them, I was now registered with them and
could upgrade to v4.0 for a nominal fee.
I only had to return their letter to me as 'proof of purchase' of
the original product. No disks, manual front pages or anything else was
required.
Don
Don,
I suspect you were one of the lucky ones in the transfer from Commodore
to Lattice. When Lattice took over support from Commodore, they were
supposed to send us their list of registered users. Lattice never received
this list (which has probably caused much of the trouble that is being
discussed here). This is all hearsay since it is before my time with
Lattice, but I have no reason to believe that it isn't true.
— Mike Roth / Lattice
Mike,
I also got the Amiga C compiler from the CBM's dev kit. When Lattice
4.0 was released I got a mailing from Lattice offering an upgrade. I
wasn't interested at the time (being a satisfied Manx user). When Lattice
5.0 came out, I _was_ interested but was not notified of an upgrade offer.
I called Lattice. They said I wasn't on their registered list. I told them
that I'd received an upgrade offer from 4.0. They said that they'd gotten
CBM's list for the 4.0 mailing but they didn't update their database and no
longer had the list. They would honor the 5.0 upgrade offer if I sent in
one of my 3.01 or 3.03 disks or even a photocopy of the disk. I was
impatient so instead of sending the disk I went to my dealer and bought
5.02 off the shelf.
I guess my understanding of the transfer was a bit off. I guess Lattice
was offering to register users only if they upgraded to 4.0. I do suspect
that some of the Commodore registered users got lost in the shuffle,
though.
— Mike Roth
Mike,
I had the Commodore C compiler. I just sent Lattice a xerox picture of the
original disks and a check for th
e right amount. They accepted it.
……Betty
Mike,
I guess I was lucky, Lattice must have gotten the list at some
point, as that's the only way they could have gotten my name and address.
It was about the same time that 4.0 became available.
I heard 3rd hand that CBM sent the list, Lattice used it once for
that mailing and then dumped it for some reason or other.
Don
Mike,
I certainly never received anything from Lattice, otherwise I MIGHT not
have been complaining so much.
Jerry.
Did anyone else notice anything real strange about what Jerry Masker said
about buying his MANX version. In message 107354 he says he bought his MANX
version in March 1986! I bought my A1000 at that time, bought Lattice v3.03
in December 1986 as the ONLY 'C' compiler available for the Amiga. As a
regular reader of USENET from about july 1986 on, I remember the talk of
the MANX compiler becoming available later than early 1987. I would guess
summer of 1987. I think Jerry is just trying to discredit Lattice and it
would be wise to ignore him. He don't know the facts.
—Mike
Mike,
I would have to locate my cancelled check, but, I got my 1000 in July of
'85 with Lattice 3.03. The machine sat around unused for a few months
while I finished up a commercial project on the ST. In Feb or so of '86 I
started using the Amiga and realized that Lattice 3.03 just wouldn't cut
it. At that time I purchased the Aztec compiler (the "commercial" version,
when there was such a distinction). I originally got version 3.20. This
was in the spring of '86. Jerry's assertion that he got the Aztec compiler
in March '86 jives with when I got mine.
-sja
Steve, gee, you made me remember that day that I got something in a very
colorful carton full of wonderful pictures called an Amiga 1000. (grin)
Has it been that long already?! How time flies.
Khalid.
Khalid,
Sure does seem like a long time. The Amiga 1000 over there sure has
sent me through some "interesting" (ahem) times during the past few years.
If anything it's told me alot about the nature of some people. (But that's
another looong story). I'm really happy with how things are going with it
now, though. 🙂
I'll never forget the day I got the machine….I brought it home, and was
setting it up when I realized I couldn't find the keyboard cable. (The
store was closed by this time). I went nuts! I finally found it taped to
one of the bottom of one of the styrofoam inserts in the box. 🙂
Steve
The cancelled check refers to exactly when I got Aztec (altho is was spring
of '86). I definitely got 3 developer machines in July of '85.
Well, I guess I'm wrong then about when the Aztec compiler. It sure seemed
obvious that there wasn't a choice when I got mine. And I remember people
waiting for Aztec when it came out later (or so I assumed). I have no
reason to not believe you, and I'll take your word on it, but it is real
hard to believe that I would have missed the choice availability on USENET.
Thanks.
Mike,
After thinking more about it, I realize what happened back then and why I
didn't consider the Manx compiler. I had just learned to program in 'C' and
all the examples I saw for the Amiga were for the Lattice compiler. I have
found Manx adds in AmigaWorld during that time frame. Jerry, if your
reading this, I sure apoligize. I don't agree about your comments in
regards to Lattice support, but that was no reason to jump on you like
that, particularly when I was so wrong.
I didn't finish my thought about Lattice examples. I needed the examples,
although I STILL haven't looked at enought of them, and therefore didn't
consider the Manx compiler.
—Mike P.S. Anything else you all want to know about AllocMem() ?
Mike,
No offense taken; note I'm responding to your second message, not the
first. I've got receipts here in my drawer; 12/5/85 for Lattice and 3/4/86
for Manx. As for the examples, … I found that Lattice couldn't handle
about half of the PD stuff I ran through it – code generation bugs,
particularly with handling arrays of structs, which the compiler doesn't
tell you about – you gotta find them the hard way. Manx handled them just
fine – even when the readme files said that the source was set up for
Lattice!!! There must have been an earlier version of the compiler that
.. worked.
I've been hearing that customer support has changed … a LOT … since
those early days, so I'm gonna bow out of this one, even if I started it.
🙂
Jerry.
Jerry, I haven't had alot of interaction with Lattice support at least in
the early days. Now I come right here to Mike Roth unless I need a patch,
then I have to go to the lattice BBS. It seems like there were many more
Aztec examples right after I got Lattice. I wish now that I had bought both
to compare. I wish I had learned to use Lattice better in the past also.
🙂
Seems to me like you've had lots of interaction with Lattice support,
considering that Mike R and the Lattice BBS are included in it 😎
Yes I've probably got my fair share of support from Lattice lately, mostly
from Mike. I probably have called the Lattice BBS no more than 15 times in
3.5 years. I was getting to the fact (to Jerry) that I didn't have that
much experience with their service in those days that he was complaining
about. Yes I saw your smiley face. I'd smile too but my foot is still stuck
in my mouth.
—Mike
I think it would be wise to ignore you in this case rather than Jerry –
Aztec C for the Amiga shipped in early 1986 (sometime around the 1st
quarter).
-Mike
Yea, It's been pointed out that I missed on this one. Real sorry about
that. I don't have any malice towards Manx, or Jerry. Might even buy Aztec
one of these days, but I've been happy with Lattice, more so now than then.
Why did you you keep the product so quiet back then? 🙂
—Mike
No problem 😎
We didn't keep the product quiet – we did what we could to make Aztec C
well known. However, C= apparently only wanted _one_ C compiler available
for their machine, and seemed to do what they could to suppress us.
-Mike
Yes, I realized after asking why Aztec was kept quiet that I was totally
confused. I then remembered that at the time I didn't consider Aztec
because of all the source available for Lattice, which I really needed. I'm
sure I wouldn't have gone wrong with your compiler but I'm happy with this
one. Keep up the good work. The competition is good for us users. 🙂
—Mike
Mike,
Looking at my original Manx manual…it's got a Feb 1986 copyright
on it…and my memory says that's about right for when we got it too.
That was for version 3.2
The version 3.4 addendum sheet is dated Feb 87.
Don