Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!shelby!neon!torrie From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (The Ghost Who Walks) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: FACTS ABOUT WB2.0 (Was: Re:WB2.0 for non-A3000) Message-ID: <1991Feb8.213211.28417@Neon.Stanford.EDU> Date: 8 Feb 91 21:32:11 GMT References: <5542@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk> <1484@pdxgate.UUCP> <1991Feb8.195254.25529@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> Sender: torrie@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Evan James Torrie) Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Lines: 30 consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Marcus Cannava) writes: >Personally, I'm not complaining about the delay for a finalized version >of WB2.0. Take a look over in the Macintosh world. How long has System 7 >been promised? Is it here yet? No. System 7 is 2 years overdue. While I don't want to defend the debacle of System 7.0, it isn't 2 years overdue. The technology for System 7.0 was announced in May 1989. At the time, Apple refused to give a date of when it would be released, but most people expected it to be around March-May of 1990. Apple then gave a date of around Christmas 1990. That was then revised to before the summer of 1991. So if you ask Apple, they will say it's only 6 months late (compared to when they actually said they would have it available). If you ask most developers, they'll say it's about a year late (when it ships this May). Of course, if you're a developer, you've already had System 7.0 for six months. Now, if I recall, I've been reading about WorkBench 2.0 (or was it 1.4 :-)) in Amiga magazines since late 1989. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Torrie. Stanford University, Class of 199? torrie@cs.stanford.edu Fame, fame, fame... What's it good for? Ab-so-lute-ly nothing