CompuServe Thread

#Software

13 messages in this thread
#4365From: Betty Clay/SYSOPDec 30, 1988 10:50 PM
As a user, I would probably not use your library. I don't use the ARP library. My workbench is full to the brim with things I have to have using the Amiga libraries. It isn't that the ARP library isn't good – it is. And I'm sure yours is, too. But there is a limit to the amount of stuff I can add to my workbench, and I've reached it. I RESENT programmers who tell me that I can't use their program unless I add XXXXXX to my workbench disk, because it just won"t hold any more!
#4373From: microsmithsDec 31, 1988 11:34 AM
With libraries, it is possible for an application to open a library on the program diskette rather than requiring it to be on the WBench diskette "libs:" directory. This will allow an application to use a library which isn't installed on WorkBench. To do this, the application should first try to open the library by it's normal name, such as OpenLibrary("arp.library"); if that works, the user has already installed the library and you're home clear. If it doesn't work, the application can then try to open the library from an explicit place, such as on the application's disk, with a full path name specified, such as OpenLibrary("TxEd:libs/arp.library"). This will bring up an requester if the diskette is not inserted asking to insert the program diskette. Then the user gets another chance to insert the program diskette to get the library opened (or if the diskette was already inserted, the user doesn't have to do anything). Thus the user doesn't have to copy the library to LIBS:, and doesn't even really need to know about it aside from knowing that the program master disk needs to be inserted to get the program to run if they haven't read the installation instructions. …cheath
#4396From: Betty Clay/SYSOPDec 31, 1988 11:14 PM
Very thorough explanation, Charlie. Thanks. It does seem, however, that most programmers are just telling me that I must copy this file and that file to my WorkBench, and the software won't work without it. I guess when I just can't squeeze a single byte more onto the WB, I shall have to stop buying software.
#4436From: microsmithsJan 1, 1989 10:15 PM
More likely you'll have to buy an HD, because the supply of new software is likely to continue to grow long after you fill up your WB diskette!
#4467From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJan 2, 1989 9:22 PM
I rather hate to see the Amiga become unusable to anyone who can't afford a hard disk, though. Surely there is another way. Betty
#4556From: BILL LEACHJan 4, 1989 3:15 PM
Betty: The problem has not really become close to that point (mainly due to the outstanding design of the Amiga OS). If you have two or more floppies then the solutions are simple. You put some of the 'overflow' directories on another disk and make the appropriate 'assigns.' Of course batch files (preferably Arexx style, naturally) can be used to make necessary software configuration changes to allow running programs that require additional files. The new 'inteligent path command' will make thing even easier for floppy users. Secondarily though, an HD is essential for practically any serious computer user. Even the Incredibly Bad Machines are almost infinitely worse without one! The Amiga's multitasking nature makes the convience of an HD even more important though there are lots of 'work arounds.' 73, bill
#4608From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJan 5, 1989 7:13 PM
I have alleviated much of my trouble by using my 5 1/4" drive for a Workbench. It holds all the libs:, l:, and devs: directories – complete with all the support programs for everything I use very much. And my c: directory goes into ram. This makes the system quite usable – but still, the 5 1/4: drive can't hold even one more handler, device, etc. It is full. And there isn't nearly enough of my memory left after uploading that bloated C: directory. Yes, a hard disk would be nice – but I think lots of programmers are forgetting that hard disk owners are in the minority of their prospective customers. An awful lot of people don't even have two floppies! Betty
#4593From: colin foxJan 5, 1989 1:37 PM
You say that you would hate to see the Amiga become unusable to someone who doesn't have a harddrive- unfortunately a machine of this design (multi-tasking, graphic etc..) SHOULD HAVE come with a minimum of 1 or 2 megabytes and a harddrive! I know that some people are going to disgree, but believe me, your machine isn't =5plete without 2 megs and a HD. The Amiga 1000 was like the 128k Mac- unusable (at 256k one drive). They gave us the 128k upgrade to a whopping 512k, which is childs play. I say 2 megs, minimum! As for disks- 20 meg harddrive is the way to go. IBM drives are quite cheap. — Colin —
#4599From: microsmithsJan 5, 1989 4:48 PM
While it's certainly true that the Amiga sings when you add RAM and a hard-disk, the majority of A500 owners will never expand beyond 512K or maybe 1 Meg and 2 floppies. Even among A2000 owners there are a lot of systems without hard disk or memory expansion beyond 1 meg.
#4634From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJan 6, 1989 9:19 AM
Charlie, Dallas is not exactly a poorhouse community. We did a poll at our last club meeting, and of the 150 plus people there, only about 10 or 12 had hard disks. Betty
#4633From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJan 6, 1989 9:19 AM
Colin, they aren't cheap to put on a 1000. I see prices in the 600-800 dollar range as being the minimum, by the time you get everything needed. That is a VERY sizable amount of money for most people. It isn't even that cheap for a 2000, by the time you get the drive and the controllers. No question that they are nice to have, but must they be made a necessity? I think not. I think some people are forcing them to become that, but that they don't really HAVE to be a necessity. Betty
#4592From: colin foxJan 5, 1989 1:37 PM
Betty, I can understand your problem with the workbench disk vs libraries, but there are advantages to having a library. For one thing, programs that use it will be smaller and therefore save you space. My old file requester was 12k. If you had 3 programs on your disk that used them, then you would be using 36k for 3 copies of the same file requester, and that goes for programs running at the moment, as well. With the library, if they all used the librarie's file requester, that free's up 36k for more programs, and reduces the size in memory, since multiple programs can use the same copy of the routine. Also, as people move towards hard drives and mondo-memory, you have more freedom in how you set up your enviornment. I know it's a hassle, but what you could do (if you have the memory) is to make a LIBS: directory in ram, and assign LIBS: to RAM:LIBS or vd0: or rad: or whatever. You could also have it on another disk, and just re-assign it as necessary. Also, the point of the library is to help programmers write better and easier to use programs. It is a BIG hassle right now to use the standard system requesters (which are ugly and clunky anyways) so most programmers don't. If there was an easy way to display an error message, then it's more likely that the programmer will put that in, and the result will be an easier to use program. — Colin —
#4632From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJan 6, 1989 9:19 AM
I think what is happening is: The Amiga is going to be for the very well off only. If we can't afford hard disks and memory expansion, we can't use much of the software for the machine. Now, getting a hard disk is not impossible for me – I will get one sometime this year, I think. But it does bother me to shut out all the people who cannot afford them. I continue to wonder if it is REALLY necessary for programs to demand that I use a specific font which must be in my fonts: directory, else the program wont run. And a specific extra handler or library, etc., etc., etc. I can see your points. But I'm not convinced that ALL the things I'm required to put on my WB are necessary to the health of the software I'm running. Some of it seems to have been a whim of the programmer – and too much of that is not very considerate of people who can't afford the humongous memory and hard disks. Betty