Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!math.lsa.umich.edu!sharkey!sbcs!csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu!dtiberio
From: dtiberio@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to improve Workbench 2.0!
Message-ID: <1991Feb4.213757.27047@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Date: 4 Feb 91 21:37:57 GMT
References: <813@cbmger.UUCP> <16246@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> <1659@crackers.clearpoint.com>
Sender: usenet@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Usenet poster)
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Lines: 15

In article <1659@crackers.clearpoint.com> jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack) writes:
>
>I think that the best way to improve WB 2.0 would be to release it for the
>500, 2000 and 3000.  What's the holdup guys?
>
>Jeff Griglack
>
>--
>
>Jeff Griglack             |  Yea, I feel terrible.  I should be forced to
>jeff@fang.clearpoint.com  |  see "Cats" again.  --From "30 Something"

  WB 2.0 requires 1 meg of chip ram. The kickstart in itself is about 540k.

DavidTiberio SUNYStonyBrook2-3605 AMIGA TotoProductions DDDMEN