Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!knuth!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg
From: elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: Still no Ami businessware.
Message-ID: <00669169208@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM>
Date: 17 Mar 91 00:20:08 GMT
References: <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <39774@cup.portal.com> <39832@cup.portal.com> <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com> <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Organization: Eric's Amiga 2000 @ Home
Lines: 23

From article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, by navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas):
> Look, I agree with bunches of what you have to say, but the implication that
> Cmdre is overstrapped does not match with reality.  In reality Commodore can
> afford to pay developers to develop software, and they can afford to hire more
> programmers/engineers -- that they refuse (seemingly) to do either is the
> source of frustration.

I wonder where you get your perception about Commodore not hiring
programmers/engineers? They've been hiring programmers/engineers in a
steady stream for the last two and a half years, and are STILL looking for
people to fill a few slots (see their ads in EE Times). As for paying
developers to develop software, I can't say anything -- I'm under
nondisclosure -- but Commodore hasn't remained totally out of that either.
Just because they haven't paid Lotus $40 million dollars to build an Amiga
version of 1-2-3 doesn't mean that Commodore is standing still... all it
means is that Commodore can't easily justify paying Lotus the kind of money
that it'd take to port 1-2-3 to the Amiga, when there are other aspects of
the machine that need the cash far more (e.g., hiring more engineers to
work on AmigaDOS 2.x).

==
Eric Lee Green   (318) 984-1820  P.O. Box 92191  Lafayette, LA 70509
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM               uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg