Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!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: <835@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 5 Feb 91 09:24:19 GMT
References: <813@cbmger.UUCP> <16246@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> <1659@crackers.clearpoint.com> <1991Feb4.213757.27047@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 19

In article <1991Feb4.213757.27047@sbcs.sunysb.edu> dtiberio@csserv1.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
>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?
>
>  WB 2.0 requires 1 meg of chip ram. The kickstart in itself is about 540k.

PLEASE, ALL here! STOP telling lies!

When we talk about 2.0 going sometime to the smaller models, we
definitely speak about 2.0 *in ROM*. NOWHERE in 2.0 is a need for
1 MB Chip RAM! And as the OS sits in ROM, it also won't take 540 KB
of the RAM. But the OS is still not ready for ROM, so PLEASE be a
little patient, ok?

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