Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!vger.nsu.edu!manes
From: manes@vger.nsu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: What's Wrong with ARP!!!!
Message-ID: <305.27511607@vger.nsu.edu>
Date: 26 Nov 90 17:17:59 GMT
References: <2254@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca>
Lines: 74

In article <2254@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca>, lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) writes:
> In <253.2747d0bd@vger.nsu.edu>, manes@vger.nsu.edu writes:
>>In article <90318.162021DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu>, DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>>I have absolutely hated ARP since its very beginning.  The name 
>>'AmigaDOS Replacement Project' says it all.  It says to me anyway,
>>that Commodore does not know what it is doing and look with ARP
>>we can do it "right".
> 
> Yup... says it all. That CBM adopted much of ARP's philosophy says a lot too.
> CBM knew all along that the BCPL stuff adopted at the last minute was ill
> fitting with the rest of the machine, that it presented anomaly's that were
> unacceptable and would have to eventually be eliminated.

I agree that it needed replacement, but by Commodore not the masses.

>  
>>Well history has proven that ARP has produced more strange problems,
>>incompatibilities and other oddities than it ever solved.  It also
>>proves that the masses can't do a better job.
> 
> Oh? I had problems with exactly 3 of the ARP commands, and no more. I wish I
> could have said the same for the supplied Amigados commands. Remember, we are
> talking about history here, and not the supplied commands as we now know them,
> highly influenced by many third party ideas, ARP included.

Have you ever tried to run a installation script on a piece of commercial
software that thought it had the ARP command set?  Have you ever had a 
commercial package attempt to replace all of your Commodore supplied commands
with ARP versions?

My problem with ARP is simple.  It did not come from Commodore.  It had
little or no support, and in my opinion was not as useful as some of the
'shells' that have been in the PD for the longest time.

> 
>>It is hard enough for most to learn AmigaDOS, adding a command set that
>>doesn't work particularly well does nothing but add a support headache
>>for Commodore and their dealers, and makes the outsiders believe that
>>AmigaDOS needed replacement.
> 
> I would agree, though I fail to see where the ARP command set "doesn't work
> particularly well". As of the inception of ARP, the Amigados command set did
> not work particularly well, or consistently. It _did_ need replacement. The
> interfaces to the Amigados functions _did_ need revamping. That CBM apparently
> agrees is ample proof that ARP was, if not the total answer, at least a
> demonstration that the concepts were valid.

See above.  Who should change it?  Commodore.


> 
>>I support Dan Silva's position on this.

Eeek, did I type that... Sorry Peter!  :-)

> 
> -larry
> 
> --
> The only things to survive a nuclear war will be cockroaches and IBM PCs.
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 
> |   //   Larry Phillips                                                 |
> | \X/    lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips |
> |        COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322  -or-  76703.4322@compuserve.com        |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

 -mark=
     
 +--------+   ==================================================          
 | \/     |   Mark D. Manes                    "Mr. AmigaVision" 
 | /\  \/ |   manes@vger.nsu.edu                                        
 |     /  |   (804) 683-2532    "Make up your own mind! - AMIGA"
 +--------+   ==================================================