Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk
From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to improve Workbench 2.0!
Message-ID: <809@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 30 Jan 91 16:03:07 GMT
References: <1991Jan27.105252.7019@marlin.jcu.edu.au> <783@cbmger.UUCP> <16165@sdcc6.ucsd.edu>
Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 39

In article <16165@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) writes:
>I do not personally own/use Workbench 2.0, but to the extent
>that Colin and Matt's criticisms are still accurate I concur
>on the majority of them.  Amiga hackers need to learn that
>most of the world doesn't enjoy seeking out replacement
>console handlers from obscure academic network sites. 

I agree fully with you that it should not be needed for every user
to get a replacement Shell or anything from outside to get to work
with his machine. Commodore tries hard to provide all what is
usefull already in the basic setup.
 
>  I noticed the first reply to Colin and
>Matt's posting 'answered' most of their criticisms/suggestions
>with hackers' answers.

I hope you don't speak of my answer. Because I wanted to point
out that at least the items mentioned by me are already "in there"
or work only slightly different than asked for. I even hate the
attitude of some "hackers" (as you call them) to not even consider
what they have got with the machine because they have prejudices
against original (Commodore) products and instantly grab for
something that has a nice individual or else non-standard smell.
Here at Commodore I mean that I should work with that equipment,
also software-wise, which is basically provided. And I always
found that this is not at all as limited as some of those hackers
always state. Just by looking a little deeper into the provided
manual I often found something new/creative what served me
exceptionally well. 

So it is our problem to ask ourselves "Is it not intuitive enough
how it is designed currently?" and "Did we explain that not well
enough in the manuals? Did we explain it but hid it in a nice but
never looked-at place in the manual?". So you can be sure that such
wishes are at least considered in the latter aspect.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk