CompuServe Thread

#Amiga 1200 Released

30 messages in this thread
#74127From: Peter M. D'AngeloOct 21, 1992 9:52 PM
Mark, seems like you're on the wrong end of the information chain. I saw the release at 6:30 EDT at my dealer. Actually it was a release to developers. This machine is out so wake up and start promoting it. Mabe you can use the sales. Peter Live from New York on Autopilot
#74179From: Steve AhlstromOct 22, 1992 9:34 AM
Peter, Developer information is not public information. Dealers who devulge confidential information should not be dealers (or developers) and developers who who release information without authority should be kicked out of the developer program. By publicly admitting that you are spreading confidential information you have put yourself in a precarious legal position. That being said, I will also say that I believe the A1200 to be possibly the most significant Amiga to be released since the A1000. -sja
#74195From: Forrest McKinneyOct 22, 1992 10:26 AM
I agree CBM out to very much remove developers from the program that leak info, or that are just in the program to buy machines at lower prices… By the way dealers do not receive developers notices, only developers (which some are also dealers), dealers usually here anouncements from there customers or CBM (a week or two after a release) for exampple it took about 8 days after the A4000 and A600 were released before CBM sent my notice… Forrest
#74205From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiOct 22, 1992 1:56 PM
A British editor friend called me today to tell me that the A1200 was shown to the press yesterday and launched publically today over there. So methinks the cat's out of the bag. "Being a writer under non-disclosure is like being Marc Barrett and not being allowed to whine incessantly."
#74213From: Steve AhlstromOct 22, 1992 2:32 PM
Denny, I've got a call in to CATS to see if the NDA on the A1200 has been lifted. I can't say anything about an A1200 until it has been lifted, other than to say that some of the descriptions of the machine that I've read in messages here are incorrect in some aspects and incomplete in others (as I'm sure you know from the mailing all devs received last week).
#74243From: Denny Atkin [COMPUTE/AmiOct 22, 1992 8:17 PM
Steve, I've got a call into CBM marketing (I got info on "non-disclosed stuff" from them too) asking if I can get permission to clarify misinformation. Hopefully I'll hear something in the morning.
#74653From: Joanne DowOct 26, 1992 2:45 AM
Folks in the support conferences are foaming at the mouth over this one. It reminds me of an event about 1969 or so. I was working on a project with some heavily classified frequencies. I also had in my hands an advertisement from a crystal filter vendor with those frequencies listed by function and channel number. It took the Navy some three months or more to declassify things. Large organizations move slowly. I sure hope I (and prolly Steve and maybe Harv) have a chance to take Dionne or whomever aside and inform the poor deluded souls of the realities of worldwide communications networks and how fast the news moves over them. They need to learn that they are facing a global information net that moves things nearly as fast as their corporate decision trees can move the information. {@_@}
#74214From: Steve AhlstromOct 22, 1992 2:39 PM
Denny, I just got off the phone with CATS. The A1200 NDA has _not_ been lifted for North American developers. Since the information posted here so far about the A1200 is not fully correct, hopefully a clarification will be made by an European user.
#74230From: Erron AdamsOct 22, 1992 5:16 PM
Evidently these "CATS" aint heard of the Global Village concept, man!
#74654From: Joanne DowOct 26, 1992 2:45 AM
Um, I have "heard" from – oh we'll call the source "Deep Commodore" – that they are under orders from way way up the chain. THat is why I hope we get a chance to brief "way up the chain" about the global information village at the Jan DevCon in Orlando. {@_@} (Please DO give the CATS guys a break. They bend over backwards to help the developer community. They really do. But they also have to follow their boss' orders. {O.O} )
#74724From: Erron AdamsOct 26, 1992 4:07 PM
Sure I'll give them a break. Actually my attitude was more one of amusement than annoyance. And it's nice to hear the guys are helpful.
#74273From: Ronald B. RomineOct 22, 1992 10:25 PM
"Being a writer under non-discloure is like being Marc Barrett and not being allowed to whine incessantly." Being under non-disclosure, WOULD be MB's worst nightmare. I read his USENET posts all the time. His messages can be amazing in there ablitiy to cause riots. Someday, I might reply to one of his posts, but I some armour first. Ron.
#74323From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPOct 23, 1992 4:13 PM
Uh….believe it or not MB has developer status…..or at least he did at one time.
#74737From: Andy FinkelOct 26, 1992 5:00 PM
Marc was under nondisclosure for awhile (somehow he was in the developer program for awhile). He interpreted the non-disclosure to mean that he wasn't allowed to post any _correct_ information he was given! 🙂 (seriously) andy
#74746From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPOct 26, 1992 5:55 PM
He's not still a developer is he? Steve
#74788From: Andy FinkelOct 26, 1992 10:23 PM
I doubt it. andy
#74194From: Forrest McKinneyOct 22, 1992 10:26 AM
I wish developers would pay attention to there non-disclosure contracts with CBM that they made when they became a developer. When it and if it is released or any other machine for that matter info and pricing will be at your amiga dealer usually the week after an official release, until then it does not exist. Forrest
#74246From: Mark D. ManesOct 22, 1992 8:29 PM
Releases to developers are protected by Non-Disclosure agreements. That document was not for public eyes. My point stands. We at Video Computer Resources understand our commitments to Commodore and our agreement on file with Commodore. It would be my suggestion that you ask your dealer to get CATS to clear this document–something they will not do by the way. -mark=
#74264From: Betty Clay/SYSOPOct 22, 1992 9:47 PM
Peter, You don't seem to understand – and neither does your dealer, apparently – that information sent to developers is not to be shared with anyone who is not a developer. Your dealer had to sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to become a developer. Everyone who has signed those agreements is both morally and legally obliged to refrain from spreading any word about any product that has not been announced by Commodore. And any developer who breaks his word to Commodore and spreads information that has not been released is very, very likely to lose his developer status as soon as Commodore learns about it. Not only that, he is legally liable and can, if Commodore so chooses, be sued for damages resulting in the premature release of information. —Betty
#74493From: Paul ToalOct 25, 1992 12:19 AM
Some of this precious information really isn't. I've always been able to ask a dealer/developer what was the latest news. Once in a while one will be reluctant, but I always hear or overhear what the latest developements are. The only question is when something will be available. I'm sure there are developers who stick by the rules, but if I want to know whats going on, I get my answers with a smile and "you didn't hear it from me". Most users who care about the machine always know what's coming down the the pike, it's just the WHEN that's not always easily gotten. I'm sure these sources, or leaks as some call them, aren't done to be belligerent. They (he or she) want to make me as happy as possible because they know I put a lot of money in their pocket. They know I feel special to have privileged information and will make it easier to reciprocate, thats just speculation, I don't really know the reason for not clamming up. What is done with the NDA info is another topic but it's no big deal that it's not as secret as some wish it was, or thought it was. It's been that way for a very long time and is just part of the "way it is". But you didn't here it from me 🙂
#74529From: Jim Nangano/SYSOPOct 25, 1992 11:50 AM
Paul, The "real" problem with the casual leaking of information (in my opinion and in my self-serving interests) is that I, as a developer, really do need this information as it directly has an effect on how I'm going to be getting my next meal. With the prevalent trickle-leaks coming from some developers, my source of information is in jeopardy, as Commodore will be more reluctant to be forthcoming with developers about new things. Unfortunately, there are a number of "developers" who do have access to the information, but are not really doing commercial development for the Amiga, and therefore only risking their source of information, not their source of income. For them, the "risk" is small, yet they are also jeopardizing my livelihood!
#74634From: Gail M. BrownOct 26, 1992 1:23 AM
Bob, A very good answer. Gail
#74584From: Mark D. ManesOct 25, 1992 7:40 PM
Even though I am a dealer, I *never* release stuff covered by NDA. However, it is apparent that the problem of releasing information covered by NDA is rampant among dealers. I think I would support C= limiting the developers program to people who are actually developing a product, or have a product out their they need to support. This should eliminate some dealers, and it might tighten things up for Commodore. -mark=
#74644From: Paul ToalOct 26, 1992 2:19 AM
But why? NDA's serve no purpose.
#74666From: Ronald B. RomineOct 26, 1992 4:28 AM
I'll disagree. NDA's do serve a purpose. Several in fact. First, they keep beta-testers from posting the specs of machines that are still undergoing changes. There is nothing worse that being told about a great new feature, and deciding *that* feature makes the machine, and not getting it. Second, who would buy "today's" Amiga's if they KNEW about the one that will be "finished" in only 6 months? This is referred to as the Osborne Syndrome. Osborne released a great CP/M computer, everyone loved it. Osborne then said they were developping a new CP/M computer and get the specs. Everyone STOPPED buying their computers, they were waiting for the new one. But Osborne needed to keep saling the first computer, to pay for R&D for the second. Osborne, went bankrupt real quick. Some argue over the cause & effect, but it did affect the way others released information about their developments. It stops (or slows) talk about vaporware. This is related to the first reason. Ever wonder how many *different* A4000 Amiga models were being tested? Or even how many experimental "ECS" Amigas were dropped for newer AGA models? Not telling us, protects us from confusion. I once met someone that thought the developer "v34" of AmigaDOS meant 34 versions had been *released*! Ron. – ap'ing with AP. (Eagles may fly, but weasles aren't sucked into jet engines.)
#74715From: Greg GivlerOct 26, 1992 12:53 PM
Uh… If it is a developer release that you are speaking of, then the way I see it, you're violating the Non-Disclosure Agreement that all Commercial developer's sign. I don't know if Certified Developer's a required to sign a NDA also, but I also don't think that they get the most up to date news. They certainly don't pay as much to be a Developer. 🙂 If you are violating a NDA I would advise that you stop, as CATS does monitor this group. Also I should say something to them myself. Greg Greg Givler – CBMSER Sysop Commodore Product Assurance
#74728From: Michael GerardOct 26, 1992 4:19 PM
Greg: Peter is not a developer… he said that his dealer showed him what he believed to be developers information. Peter is not party to any NDA. His dealer is, and, IMHO, his dealer shouldn't be a dealer. How a dealer can complain about piracy andd then violate an NDA is beyond me.
#74747From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPOct 26, 1992 5:55 PM
Yup…certs have to sign NDA's too. Steve
#74794From: Betty Clay/SYSOPOct 26, 1992 10:57 PM
Greg, It is my understanding that the NDA we certified developers sign is exactly the same as the one commercial developers sign. We don't have to pay as much because we don't get (or need) as much support, among other things. —Betty
#74796From: Peter M. D'AngeloOct 26, 1992 11:00 PM
Greg, I guess you don't have Autopilot so it might be difficult for you to read the thread. I am not in any way bound by a NDA. I was the one that compromised my dealers confidence. I was bugging him about a new system for about three weeks. It seemed that I was going to be Promoted to G.M. for a Bennigans in New York so the first thing I wanted to do with ny extra cash was to purchase an Amiga 4000. I got passed up for this promotion and all of a sudden my purchase of the 4000 went from immenent to never in a million years. I went in one day and an employee of his was talking about the 1200 only I didn't know. I was using the 4000 at the time. The owner came up to me and asked me how badly I wanted one and then told me about the 1200. He did this in confidence and I didn't know this. I had no Idea this was privilaged information, even more so because when I got home that night and logged onto that other system (GEnie) there was a file complete with release info. This excited me and I spilled my guts, but only after the fool who uploaded the specs. Check out the library here. I uploaded a copy of the. The culprits name and the name of the Commodore official who sent the to him is still on them. I sugest you send him a message threatening him like you did me. Your lucky your not in my industry. You wouldn't make a dime. I love Commodore and I love my Amigas (all three of them, plus a 128 and a 64). Can you blame me for getting excited about a new release. Peter Live from New York on Autopilot