CompuServe Thread

#Amiga CD32

11 messages in this thread
#110841From: Steve Bennett/SYSOPAug 19, 1993 1:40 PM
Um… As I recall, CDTV information was generally available to developers almost a full year before the machine was released…
#110949From: Black Belt SystemsAug 20, 1993 12:42 PM
You mean "CDTV is being worked on"? If you call that informaation… :^) We were *completely* unable to get ahold of a CDTV until they were released; tht kind of support caused us to forget the whole thing.
#110969From: Jonathan BlackwellAug 20, 1993 3:38 PM
Ben- maybe you didn't get information until it was released, but I know of at least 5 different software houses that were in full CD master production at the time of CDTV's release. That means they worked with it long before it was released.
#111052From: Brian BartlettAug 21, 1993 4:48 AM
no, all that means is that they were given the technical specifications of the machine prior to release, not the actual machine. While the latter technique is typical of the industry, the former is quite typical of Commodore.
#111178From: Black Belt SystemsAug 22, 1993 12:48 PM
And that should suggest a lot to you.
#111093From: Dale LarsonAug 21, 1993 12:32 PM
Computer companies have mostly stopped doing it, but many other kinds of compainies (including game console companies) decide to keep some projects secret on the grounds that it (supposedly) buys them some strategic advantage. If Sega or Nintendo comes out with a new super-secret platform, you bet they work with a few of what they've decided are key developers, making them sign extrordinary agreements. They don't tell everybody that develops games for their existing platforms, just those few key people. Looks like Commodore may have done the same thing with CDTV and CD32. Those things are much more like game consoles than like computers, so I think it isn't fair to judge by computer rules. The way it was handled is hardly unprecedented in the game console industry, whether or not we agree with it.
#111181From: Black Belt SystemsAug 22, 1993 1:29 PM
Dale, as a developer I'm constrained in the extent to which I can comment on the new CD32. As for CDTV, it was a complete screwup from beginning, to end. In my opinion. I *will* say that my expectations for the new unit are eqully low, but like most everyone else, I hope I'm wrong.
#111271From: Aug 23, 1993 1:01 PM
Ben, as I today received a Danish computer magazine featuring a two pages CD32 presentation including 4 colour photos from different angles as well as inside, you may be able to comment freely on the CD32 now! By the the way it looks really neat and priced very aggressively at a price of 2/3 of a bare CD-ROM drive including one CD-ROM with a Danish encyclopedia (BTW also included with the CDTV). Regards, J0RGEN ….from DENMARK
#111321From: Black Belt SystemsAug 24, 1993 12:02 AM
Oh, I can comment on CD32 – I think it's a neat box, for a 1200. :^) What I can't comment on is CBM's level of CD32 marketing support to developers; the amount of leadtime notice of its introduction provided to major developers; and the tools and hardware made available to us. I wish I could. I really do. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#111393From: Dale LarsonAug 24, 1993 2:56 PM
As a former Engineer at Commodore, I have the same constraints that you do. 🙂 Most don't apply once the product is released somewhere in the world because the "publicly available information" clause comes into play. Dale Larson – An Amiga Software Engineer with some time on his hands.
#111502From: Black Belt SystemsAug 25, 1993 12:34 PM
It's not public information how the development process was gone about, with regard to developers. Until I see that it is, I have no comment on it. –Ben …via AutoPilot