Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!strath-cs!bsyme
From: bsyme@cs.strath.ac.uk (Brian J Syme IE88)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: FACTS ABOUT WB2.0 (Was: Re:WB2.0 for non-A3000)
Message-ID: <5569@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk>
Date: 11 Feb 91 12:06:25 GMT
References: <43860@ut-emx.uucp> <5547@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk> <43921@ut-emx.uucp>
Organization: Comp. Sci. Dept., Strathclyde Univ., Scotland.
Lines: 60

In article <43921@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes:
>
>Most people have
>not even _heard_ of updates to 1.3.  How many of you have _heard_ about
>version 1.3.3?  Do you realize that you've had a program around called 
>Setpatch to patch the bugs in the 1.3 ROM?  

	Games users are unlikely to be affected or really notice OS bugs
	for the simple reason that almost all big name games kill the OS,
	the rest of us would be better served by a SERIOUS OS patch service
	(i.e. register and get sent disks). Yes I do know about setpatch!
	There are PD fixes for the interlace bug (which I've never been
	bitten by, though I dont doubt it exists.)

>
>I look forward to the day that I can pop a 2.0 ROM into my Amiga, but I don't
>want to have to replace that ROM because some major bug slipped through.  Bug
>patches make the OS look flawed and unprofessional.

	They also make it look actively supported - I`m quite sure that
	there will be plenty of bugs in 2.0 when it is released, and the
	patches will surely follow..

>You can't use Windows 3.0 for 4 hours straight without a crash.

	Want a bet? 'fraid that's what I've been doing for months now.
	Oh, if only Intuition was a patch on Windows 3! Even the 2.0
	intuition looks (can't speak for the internals) poorer than W3
	(to me anyway.)

>MSDOS 5.0?  Don't make me laugh...

	Not much more than a program loader anyway, it's what you run
	on top that counts. However we stray from the point, I would
	run Unix/X11 and I *KNOW* there are bugs and problems with both
	but the pace of development is good.

>_Every_ little detail is being checked and double-checked.
>2.0, when released, will be one of the most solid OSes around.  

	And triple, and quadruple, and, and,.... all well and good, I
	want it checked, but the point of diminishing returns rushes
	towards us..

>Honestly, if you think you can get better results with DOS machines or 
>whatever else, feel free to give them a try.  You're in for a _big_
>disappointment.  

	The simple fact is that "DOS" machines are improving at a
	superb rate. They are CHEAP and FAST. There is a MASSIVE
	market. Two years ago I wouldn't have touched a PC with a
	barge pole, the relative pace of development has changed
	that. The Amiga stagnated, the PC's surged...

-- 
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<> Brian Syme            <> Why make things difficult, when with just a     <>
<> bsyme@cs.strath.ac.uk <> little more effort you could make them          <>
<>                       <> impossible.                                     <>
<><><><><> *WARNING* Signature dying of old age... ><><><><><><><><><><><><><>