home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
- Path: sparky!uunet!news.smith.edu!sophia.smith.edu!jfieber
- From: jfieber@sophia.smith.edu (John Fieber)
- Subject: Re: @$#^@$%# 2.04!
- Message-ID: <1992Jul30.203629.245@sophia.smith.edu>
- Sender: root@sophia.smith.edu (Operator)
- Organization: Smith College
- References: <1992Jul30.060025.10217@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> <1992Jul30.141311.17544@fripp.ri.cadre.com> <30JUL199213302905@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:36:29 GMT
- Lines: 60
-
- In article <30JUL199213302905@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov> smneyln@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Michael Neylon) writes:
- >>2.04 and that this is not illegal to do.) I've also installed ROM
- >>cards in a couple of 1000's. THey're pretty cheap, and relatively
- >>easy to put in.
- >
- >Thank god for sockets! Imagine trying to replace the motherboard!
-
- There is no problem upgrading a 1000 to use the 2.04 rom, you
- just need one of those little daughter boards to stick the new
- rom on. I think the common *perception* that the 1000 is not
- upgradeable simply due to the fact that Commodore does not happen
- to make the little board. I realize the 1000, being the
- `prototype', would be considerable headache for Commodore to
- support fully, I'm not so sure completely dropping support is
- wize either.
-
- Instead, if Commodore had offered a 1000 upgrade kit with a
- disclaimer saying ther could not guarantee everything to work
- properly then many perope would be much happier. 1000 owners are
- a dedicated and adventurous group that kept the Amiga alive and
- growing. They are most certainly not pansies and could deal with
- a disclaimer in exchange for not being "forgotten".
-
- >IBM machine, but I will never give up on my Amiga. It has and will serve
- >me well. Now if we can only get C= off their butts and make them advertise..
-
- I think we need some more specific terminology for referring to
- Commodore. Something like:
-
- C= for Commodore in general
- C=M for Commodore management
- C=E for Commodore engineers
-
- Most complaints I hear about C= are actually about C=M. I think
- C=E is doing a pretty good job.
-
- >As for software, there is no need for 'standard' (software that doesnt
- >mess with the actual system) software to be system dependant. It should
- >be able to use libraries of both systems equally well...
-
- Uh, the problem is that most of the libraries in 2.0 have a *lot*
- of *extremely* useful features designed for the use of these so
- called `standard' applications (BOOPSI for example) that simply
- don't exist in the 1.3 versions of those libraries. And then there
- the entirely new libraries in 2.0 such as gadtools and asl which
- were clearly designed with `standard' software in mind.
-
- The size of the rom doubled from 1.3 to 2.0 for a reason - to make
- high quality and consistant `standard' applications easy to program.
- Of course, it also makes bizarre non-standard apps much easier
- as well, but that is beside the point.
-
- Also, I don't want *any* software that messes with the system. I
- want software that uses the system to accomplish something useful.
-
- -john
-
-
- --
- ===jfieber@sophia.smith.edu==================================================
-