Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:37871 comp.sys.amiga.tech:6486
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!sharkey!itivax!abaa!esker
From: esker@abaa.uucp (Lawrence Esker)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Denise/Paula/Agnus/Gary/Portia
Summary: Reality verses make believe veses idealistic
Message-ID: <713@neptune.UUCP>
Date: 4 Aug 89 14:46:30 GMT
References: <1388@bnr-fos.UUCP>
Reply-To: esker@neptune.UUCP (Lawrence Esker)
Organization: Allen Bradley, Ann Arbor
Lines: 52
UUCP-Path: uunet!frith!eecae!neptune!esker

In article <1388@bnr-fos.UUCP> protcoop@leibniz.uucp () writes:
>                                                     ...Let us *suppose*
>that the Amiga 3000 did not use Commodore's custom chips but used some
>'off the line' parts by other companies, for example the TI 34000 (?)
>blitter.  Let us further suppose that all of the system software looks
>the same to the programmer, i.e. all of the function calls are the same.
>Would it not be possible for current software to work on both the new
>hardware and the old hardware?  The way I see it is that in my programs
>I have to open libraries to call routines.  If I am on the current Amiga
>then the library I get is one that supports that machine.  If I am on
>the new Amiga 3000, then the library that gets opened is one that
>supports the new hardware...

In the land of dragons, unicorns and faeries, you are absolutely correct
in your assumptions.  From what I've seen in the Amiga and from Comodore
in the last 4 years, what you suggest is why Comodore stresses the proper
use of library routines, etc.  But, a big but, there are alot of developers
out there who, for whatever reasons, beleive they can get squeeze better
performance out of the machine by doing things their own way.  Look at how
much software breaks when there have been operating system changes.  EVERY
ONE OF THESE FAILURES IS DUE TO VIOLATING AMIGA "RULES", imho.

In the land of schedules, costs, and profits, what you say is not conceivable.
In my years of experience, the more that is changed, the longer things will
take, the more money is lost, and the more bugs will be introduced.  I would
say that changing the hardware foundation is the extreme of change.  Did I
mention that even gremlins exist in the land of dragons.

By the way, you touched on THE reason the Amiga is superior to all other
computer systems on the market, including UNIX and VAX machines.  The common
programmers interface that operates every feature of the machine in a
unilateral and upward compatible means.  All this despite the "braindamaged"
BCPL and AmigaDOS that other threads on this net are shoving down our throats.

Yes, BCPL and AmigaDOS do not integrate well with the rest of the system, but
this is the land of reality.  Besides, I am sure there are people where BCPL
and TripOS originated that beleive C, Exec and Intuition do not integrate well
with AmigaDOS.  (Oh well, I'm rambling on.  Time to shut up.)

>Alan W. McKay  |  My opinions are mine, yours are yours. |  Eat Food  |
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^-> Devon, take heed.
-- 
---------- Lawrence W. Esker ----------  Modern Amish: Thou shalt not need any
\  *        *             *  *******  /  computer that is not IBM compatible.
 \  *        *     *     *  *        /   
  \  *        *   * *   *  *****    / Sr. Hardware/ASIC Design Engineer
   \  *        * *   * *  *        /  Allen-Bradley Communications Div.
    \  *******  *     *  *******  /   Phone:  (313)668-2500  (313)973-8561
     -----------------------------    Compuserve: ?????-????
UseNet Smart: esker@abaa.uucp  or  abaa!esker@itivax.iti.org
UseNet Other: __!uunet!mimsy!rutgers!citi!itivax!abaa!esker
Nothing left to do but :-) ;-) ;-D