Path: utzoo!censor!geac!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!evax!opperman
From: opperman@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Roger Opperman)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows Shareware
Keywords: shareware, conventions, community
Message-ID: <1990Aug24.154449.3650@evax.arl.utexas.edu>
Date: 24 Aug 90 15:44:49 GMT
References: <10297@life.ai.mit.edu>
Organization: Computer Science Engineering Univ. of Texas at Arlington
Lines: 19

In article <10297@life.ai.mit.edu> rpk@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Robert Krajewski) writes:
>I'm disappointed at the quality of Windows shareware I've seen, especially
>compared to Mac.  Now, I appreciate any that I find, but I've seen
[  misc. detailed descriptions omitted ]
>of Windows programming folklore.  There's nothing like Think C or MPW;
>DOS sux as a programming environment.
>
>Robert P. Krajewski
>Internet: rpk@ai.mit.edu ; Lotus: robert_krajewski.lotus@crd.dnet.lotus.com

There are a few differences in the situation here.  Mac shareware (and
shareware developers) has been under development for 4-5 years now.
Windows 3 has only been out for a couple of months.  The prohibitive
cost of the SDK probably has a lot to do with it also.  This is
similar to the situation when the Mac was released -- remember when
you had to buy a Lisa to do Mac development??  

In a couple of years, after the market has been given a chance to
work, I suspect that Windows shareware will be just as good.