#Continued.. some ideas
7 messages in this thread
Mail a disk to every user!>!?!? You mean like Apple…no, maybe Microsoft,
noooo, not them. Not IBM, fer shure. Who does this? I really though we did a
good thing by updating the OS for $15.00. Seesh, IBM doesn't even include the
OS. Maybe if we charged big bucks for it like, say, a CAD package, maybe $1000
extra or so, it's certainly a more complex and expensive piece of software then
99.9% of all user applications, and it must be impecibly documented, supported,
etc.
-Dave
Well said Dave, why people would complain about a $14.95 upgrade is beyond me.
Marlene
It would have been a good thing if CBM had made it official — since even after
they started shipping it, it wasn't included with the new systems, it was very
unclear to the user base just what the heck 1.2 was supposed to be… upgrade,
revision, bug fix, what? And yes, it would be expensive to do. Unfortunately.
Also unfortunately, most Software vendors won't own up to the fact that when
you sell a package and tell a user "it does this here thing", and then the user
tries it and not only does it NOT do said thing, but blows up the system as
well, that the vendor has an obligation to bring the package at LEAST up to the
level where it works as advertised. The solution is either don't ship it till
it works (unlikly, I'll grant you that… especially in the case of something
as complex as the Amiga) or provide those who paid you perfectly good money for
a broken product (transformer, AmigaDOS, TextCraft, Intuition, various DOS
commads, and so on) with versions that WORK. Transformer, for instance, is a
perfect example of a program where CBM should (a) fix it, (b) refund ALL the
money it took in. Responsibility. WHy is that an undefined term for CBM?
–Ben–
I do agree they should have handled the semantics better. As in, "this is an
official update of the AmigaOS, and will now be the only official, supported,
Amiga OS", cause that's reality, as opposed to "hey guys, we've got this nifty
'enhancer' package you may care to buy". We've flamed the sales organization
about this; hopefully it will be different when the next OS release is out.
As far as Transformer goes, (A) Commodore doesn't own the program, they had it
developed outside, and (B) there are free patches available that let it work
under 1.2 and with extra memory. Had Simile followed the rules we outlines for
software, these patches wouldn't have been necessary. As far as bugs in the
operating system, the software folks came up with a large number of patches and
workarounds for existing bugs, and fixed all kinds of stuff with 1.2. Every
program that failed due to a 1.1 bug gets fixed if it runs under 1.2.
Commodore certainly understands responsibility, that's why we tell developers
what rules they must follow to write programs in the operating system, not just
what the OS does. WHY is it so hard for some companies to follow such rules?
-Dave
You have me there, Dave, you really do. Actually, the level of compatability
between 1.1 and 1.2 is astounding… our stuff is really quite complex, and it
worked flawlessly when we got the 1.2 stuff – with the exception of that 1
pixel correction that was in the early beta releases for the sprites… but
that didn't make it to the release 1.2 anyway, so I have no gripe there. Dave,
how "official" is your presence here? We (SoftCircuits programmers, inclusive)
have a list of things we would like to see in the system, most of which are
both reasonable and across the board useful. Wanna see em? Would it do any
good? –Ben–
As far as transformer goes, it was NOT simile who was selling it; It was
Commodore. That makes it Commodores baby. It was commodore that claimed
compatability though emulation. It doesn't work anymore, if you accept that (a)
1.2 is the standard DOS, (b) that an Amiga can have autoconfig memory > 512k,
(c) that an Amiga can run a processor other than a 68000. 68020, for example.
You cannot put the blame on Simile. As a matter of fact, SImile has gone on to
prove the point that the emulation is perfectly feasable as a commercial
product. It runs just fine on an Atari, doesn't it? Furthermore (Hearsay, this
is) I understand that there IS a version that runs with 1.2 and expanded memory
(prob'ly not with an 010 or an 020, but…) and CBM has the unmitigated gall to
hold it back. They have an obligation to the poor suckers who bought
Transformer to at least release it. They have no business getting into a
squabble with Simile to the point where they cannot responsibly service their
customers. If we (SoftCircuits) had products that broke under 1.2, and didn't
supply some path to the users, I'm sure we'd be in a lot of hot water.
Fortunatly, it's not a problem for us. I think transformer is one of those
really bad mis-steps you hope a company never makes. –Ben–
I suggest you have a long talk to Bill Teal about what happened on Transformer
1.2. It seems to me that there has been a lot of misunderstanding all over on
this topic, and if nothing else, why don't we try to clear the air on it. Mr
McIntyre (have I spelled that right) told me at Amiexpo that CBM was about to
release xfrmr 1.2, though I think you've made it clear here that this won't
happen. A number of people ask whether it can run on the 500 or 2000 – a
definitive answer and explanation about the keyboard problem would really help
here. I'd also like to mention that I've heard that sales of PC Ditto on the
ST are going very well – many of us are very disappointed that we don't have
'our' product. Don't get me wrong – as I said in a very recent message, I think
CBM is really working hard to clean up its act, and I'm very happy to have my
2000. I wiou the best of luck in maintaining this new momemtum.
Ron