#WorkBench *2.0* !!!
32 messages in this thread
Hey! What's going on here!! I expected SOME talk about this, which is why
I've popped back over here after being away for awhile!
The latest issue of AmigaWorld, in their "Ear to the Ground" section at the
back, tells us that Workbench 2.0 (formally known as Workbench 1.4) is now
slated to be released in the spring.
Any comments/knowledge/expansions/rebuttals? DAVE
we expect that there is going to be a new release of the WorkBench software
at some point in time. Many of us hope it will be sooner, rather than
later. Developers are not in a legal position where they can make any
comments that include hard data, and for good reason.
Ben
Amateur Radio Callsign is A A 7 A S
The only reason I have to believe the 2.0 rumor is that Commodore
hasn't denied it. That is the kind of rumor that Commodore WOULD deny,
because it doesn't give anything essential away. Also, I remember Gail
Wellington's quote that 2.0 would be an entirely new O/S and would break a
LOT of program. That was a projection for a non-existant OS, but…
— Ethan
Ethan,
Let's put it this way…the beta's being sent out are very
definately being called 1.4. They are not being called 2.0
Don
Commodore hasn't denied lots of rumors. It doesn't make them true.
I realize that Commodore doesn't like to talk much. However denying
this rumor would not be like saying "It'll be released April 15." BTW, on
usenet I believe someone said that 1.4beta does NOT work on A1000s.
— Ethan
P.S. He was claiming to have 1.4 beta as a developer
If Commodore tried to respond to all of the rumors that ever came up, they
would spend all their time just doing that! It's not their job to squelch
all rumors that come across.
Steve
I sometimes have to advise clients on how to deal with rumors. Unless it
is an unusual situation, my standard advice is to make, and enforce, the
following:
"It is our policy to never comment on rumors."
End of discussion.
The reason is very straightforward:
If you regularly squelch rumors, when the day comes that you must refuse to
comment, you tend to send a signal that, this time, because you aren't
denying it, the rumor is true. That may or may not be the case, but that's
what the market, trained to expect denials, will read. If it's false, but
you can't, for whatever reason, comment, you are hurt. If it's true, you
may, by having set this pattern, confirm something prematurely that can
hurt you as well, perhaps by giving the competition info they wouldn't
otherwise have.
Ray Lewis
I agree completely.
Steve
Ray –
Wisdom usually floats up through the B_S.
BTW – When did you decide to become a CIA agent?
– Nelson 😎
Nelson:
Did I miss something? Me, a CIA agent? Both I, and "The Company", are
very happy that isn't the case (grin).
My business is corporate takeovers — proxy fights and tender offers.
Working on five that are public right now, and three more that will be
public within the next two weeks.
(And that's as much as I will say about that — not CIA, but, let me put it
this way, I don't own stocks, and never will. If you don't own them, you
can never be accused of insider stuff.)
Ray Lewis
A commodore sales rep has called it 2.0, take that to mean what you
like.
— Ethan
I take that to mean that the sales rep didn't know what he's talking about,
because there has been no official confirmation from Commodore. Period.
And he was *talking* about it? I thought there was a non-disclosure
agreement involved in beta-testing. <getting out pencil and notepad> JUST
who said this?
John
DAve,
My comment would be to not believe everything you read in rumors columns 🙂
We only know that the developers are beta testing 1.4, but it is only beta
2, according to what I hear. As I recall, 1.3 went through beta 9 or more,
and then into some gamma versions before it was finally released. So – I
still say it will be ready when it's ready, and then they will release it.
……Betty
Dave,
WB 1.4 is just going into wide Beta test now…so I
seriously doubt it'll be ready by spring.
As to discussions…we've beaten 1.4 to death for the last year.
Don
They said Spring, but not spring of which year!
Blaine
Don-
I don't really think this is a subject that CAN be beaten to death!
Commodore better take their time and make it good … or there are going to
be ALOT of disapointed people!
Rob
I agree, Rob. I'm *NOT* one of those who want the new version of WB now at
any cost; they need to do it SLOW but RIGHT! I merely read the thing in
AmigaWorld, was shocked, and wanted to see what was being said here. Thanks
for responding, all! DAVE
Rob:
I hafta agree. If CBM is going to just do fixes and trim up a few
nasties like they did 1.2 -> 1.3, then they should've had the code out long
ago. The development time should've been comparable to the dev time for
1.2 -> 1.3 . For the length of time they've worked on 1.4, I darned well
expect some serious improvements.
It's cool by me, and prolly everybody else, if CBM takes a long time on
producing QUALITY. It's when they take a long time producing mere bug
fixes that ticks me off. I wish CBM would release a short list of at least
PART of the WB1.4 specs so that we know what we're waiting for. NOTE:
releasing A3000 specs would prolly cut into A2x00 slaes, but releasing info
on OS updates should only RAISE sales. If we know what we're waiting for,
maybe we'd wait more peacefully. 🙂 [and maybe we'd do less
rumormongering!]
On the 2.0 thing, CBM might do well to rename WB1.4 as WB2.0, just for
marketing reasons. Previous statements about the meaning of the revision
number "2.0" would have to be scrapped, of course, but I think Amiga sales
would be helped by a bigger number. Just look at the "Photon
Paint/DigiPaint revision number war" to see what I mean. People really
think revision numbers mean something other than, "This version is
different from the last one."
I work for Washington State U's M.E. dept writing sampling software for
PC's. I changed the sampling system recently, and the configuration files
were incompatible (every version of the sampler has had a unique config
file), so I changed the veriosn number from 280 to 290. (they're displayed
with decimals to the user.) Two weeks back, I changed the actual output
file for the first time, and I went to version 300. I actually had people
telling me they liked new features in "3.00" that had always been in the
telling me they liked new features in "3.00" that had always been in the
(oop) a more compact file format.
-TL
[fixing blips in the previous page!]
..
I work for Washington State U's M.E. dept writing sampling software for
PC's. I changed the sampling system recently, and the configuration files
were incompatible (every version of the sampler has had a unique config
file), so I changed the veriosn number from 280 to 290. (they're displayed
with decimals to the user.) Two weeks back, I changed the actual output
file for the first time, and I went to version 300. I actually had people
telling me they liked new features in "3.00" that had always been in the
"2.00" series and hadn't been changed! All I'd done was go to a more
compact (binary) file format.
-TL got
it right that time, I hope…:)
Trevor,
1.4 is likely to contain serious and important improvements. Some of
them, like the ECS, have already been at least partially disclosed. Others
have been rumored but not confirmed. I personally think it wouldn't be
good for C= to say anything about 1.4 at this point. Releasing even a
partial spec sheet would only intensify the rumor-mongering and the "We
want it NOW!" nonsense. Remember 1.3 and all the crabbing that went on
here about how long it took? Anyway, I'm sure C= would prefer to emphasize
what the Amiga is capable of _today_ rather than what it might be capable
of a year (or whenever) from now. Also, it seems to me that C= has been
doing a lot of things behind the scenes, quietly, over the past 6 months or
so. I suspect that when 1.4 and/or the new Amigas are ready to roll we'll
be hearing and seeing a lot from Mr. Copperman & Co.
To sum up, I think it's best not to concern ourselves with 1.4, seeing
as how it doesn't yet exist. One of these days it'll show up at our
dealers; then we can start talking about it.
BTW, I agree with you that calling it 2.0 would be a good marketing
move. 8^)
-Dave
Dave:
The marketing side of calling the next release WB/KS 2.0 is prolly
important enough that C= is already thinking about it. Especially when the
OS version numbers on Macs, STs, and PC-clones are so much more
impessivesounding…
As fer giving minimum contents of WB1.4 (or whatever it will be
called), I must disagree. Although there are certainly things the C= is
still unsure about including, there are just as surely things that they are
absolutely sure will be in the next release. It would be wise for them to
post a short list of 'guarenteed new features' to allow Amiga owners a
chance to comment on the new OS _before_ its contents are irrevicobly set
in stone.
Fer example, one Amiga mag contained a plea by a writer who wanted the
OS to automatically request, "File burgle.doc exists. Do you want to
overwrite? Yes/No." The writer apparently thought this was how the ST OS
worked (he may be right, I don't know). Personally, I can't think of any
feature I would want LESS than an automatic overwrite preventer.
Now imagine that C= has decided to build such a beasty into AmigaDOS,
right into the Write() command. Don't you think that I'd like a chance to
complain about that BEFORE it was irrevicably part of my OS?
I'm not asking for complete details or anything like that. I just want
to know if I'm waiting for a real improvement or just a bug fix.
-TL
Trevor,
Well, 1.4 is already into beta-test stage, so I presume it's pretty much
set feature-wise. If CATS wanted to (or was allowed to) I'm sure they
could produce a long list of more-or-less "guaranteed" new features. But I
seriously doubt they will. As I said before, Commodore prefers to
emphasize the Amiga's current features rather than divert potential buyers'
attentions to future (that is, currently non-existent) products. This
certainly makes good marketing sense. The downside for those of who
already own Amigas, tho, is that we have to endure C='s current silence.
There is another angle to this as well: suppose 1.4 contains some
outstanding advances, putting the Amiga in certain new areas clearly ahead
of the competition. Don't you think it would be wise in such a case for C=
to keep mum about what they've accomplished? Let the competition (and, out
of necessity, Amiga owners) find out when 1.4 shows up on dealers' shelves.
[Disclaimer: I have no knowledge of any "outstanding advances" in 1.4.
This, of course, doesn't necessarily mean there are none. <grin>]
Actually, the best time for Amiga users to tell CATS what they'd like to
see in a new OS release is _before_ CATS starts intensive work on that
release. I intend to give them extensive feedback on 1.4 after I've had
sufficient time to give it a good shake. 8^) At the same time I'll
certainly do some blue-skying regarding post-1.4 releases. I sure do hope
CATS sends someone _here_ to actively solicit comments from us. I doubt
they'll have any trouble getting responses!
>>continued next message<<
>>continued from previous message<<
Regarding the propriety of new 1.4 features, I guess we'll just have to
trust CATS and the alpha/beta testers not to do or allow stupid things. I'd
personally like to see CATS allow non-developer OS alpha testers; they'd
get a broader range of feedback that way. (BTW, for all those who read my
recent comments regarding beta testing, I recently spoke about this at
length with an acquaintance, who also happens to be a 1.4 beta tester. This
person has convinced me that beta-testing is best left to developers, since
it has to do with isolating and fixing bugs rather than implementing new
features.) But I understand their reasons for carefully choosing who gets
(and how many get) to test…and, thus, who gets to _know_ about all the
new features. It's a tricky thing: CATS has to weigh the importance of a
broad spectrum of feedback against the need for secrecy and then find a
workable balance. I think they could do better, but I also don't think
they're doing badly either.
-Dave
DaveK:
I can see your points, but all the big Car manufacturers hint at next
years new features, Apple and IBM tell about 'planned projects' in
Multimedia or such, and NeXT spends all there time talking about 'new stuff
our machine will support that we haven't built yet.' 🙂
I guess I can see both sides now, and I can see that there isn't any
easy solution. I see a lot of value in your statement about 'alerting the
competetition.' Hmmm.
————————————————————TL———-
Trevor –
The ST system does allow for overwrite confirmation – it's a selectable
item that can be turned off if you trust yourself enough.
Harry
I agree that not much should be said until it is announced. I wasn't around
here when the talk on v1.3 was going on, but I heard about 8 months of it
on USENET. I hope they don't announce it until about 2 weeks before
release. From what I'v heard it is going to be a BIG improvement, and the
only thing I want with it is new RKM's because it sounds like the v1.3's
might be suddenly out of date.
Mikey
Mikey,
We kinda talked 1.3 into the ground, I think. 8^) Of course, everyone
and their mothers knew what was in it, so the talk was more than mere
speculation. I think CATS learned something from that. I agree with you
about C= not announcing until the thing is ready to ship, and I also hope
we get new docs concurrently with the OS upgrade itself. T'would be nice.
<grin>
-Dave
We need new docs! The Intuition manual is great, but I STILL hate the
RKMs.
————————————————————TL———-
They also say not to read 'Ear to the Wall' if you are looking for facts.
-larry