Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!orca!quark!jeff
From: jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM (Jeff Beadles)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Shareware Mac
Message-ID: <5466@orca.WV.TEK.COM>
Date: 27 Nov 89 00:49:29 GMT
References: <641@nixpbe.UUCP> <1989Nov26.172437.10709@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <6997@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: nobody@orca.WV.TEK.COM
Reply-To: jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM (Jeff Beadles)
Followup-To: comp.sys.atari.st
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Wilsonville, OR
Lines: 34

In article <6997@portia.Stanford.EDU> zimm@portia.Stanford.EDU (Dylan Yolles)
 writes:
>Given that no one else has spoken up about it, please let me tell you
>why I am strongly *against* this idea of a shareware Mac emulator. Before
>flaming, please read on!

>- It would hurt the ST. David Small has done a great job with the Spectre,
>and sells it for a reasonable price. Quite frankly, I would like to
>seem him continue to develop fine ST products such as the '030 board
>some have been discussing. The creation of a free alternative to his
>Spectre would not encourage this. (Note, I am not connected with
>Gadgets By Small.)
...

Wait-a-bloody-second-here...

Does this mean that I should not go out and write a share-ware 
<insert generic type of program here> because it might hurt
<insert generic software house/publisher/author>'s business?

I find it rather difficult to follow this "logic".  Insert "1-2-3" and "Lotus"
in your paragraph for "Spectre" and "Gadgets by Small/David Small".  Would you
be so sympathetic for someone else?

Please don't take me wrong.  I think that David Small has made a contribution
to the ST-world.  However, I do not believe that he deserves a monopoly on the
business.  The "Shareware mac" would not have the support of David's product.
Some people would pay the extra bucks, just for the support.

[Note:  I am not a customer of Gadgets by Small. (or Lotus :-) ]

	-Jeff
-- 
Jeff Beadles		jeff@quark.WV.TEK.COM