Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!cbmnlux!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk
From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Few questions/observations about the A3000
Keywords: KS 2.0
Message-ID: <1190@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 2 May 91 08:44:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbmger.1190
References: <1991Apr24.214121.4631@javelin.sim.es.com> <1991Apr25.154002.4471@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> <1991Apr26.202103.22105@javelin.sim.es.com> <1991Apr30.160504.22656@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>
Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 21


In all these arguments whether to put 2.0 in ROM or on a KS disk,
I can contribute another one:

I favor releasing 2.0 only on ROM, because this way the customer is
forced to get it from Commodore and not just copies it at his neighbour.
This not because of the revenue (you don't make money with such
upgrades), but because of the fact that with KS on ROM there will be
included a 2.0 User manual in the package. Anyone who has an A3000
knows how big this thingie has grown.

My point is: Anyone who tries to use 2.0 without the proper manual
will fail or at least miss many of the new features. He probably
won't be able to take full advantage of the OS. So perhaps he will
be dispappointed and blame the OS/Commodore to not fulfill all his
dreams, but perhaps he just didn't know that he had to issue one
more argument to get all he wanted.

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