Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.misc:3839 comp.sys.amiga.programmer:3796 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!udel!princeton!njsmu!mccc!dworkin!johns From: johns@dworkin.Amber.COM (John Silvia) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: So, how close is WB2.0 to a burn-in date? Message-ID: Date: 22 May 91 03:06:34 GMT References: <1991May20.170355.19033@coplex.uucp> Sender: bbs@dworkin.UUCP Organization: Labyrinth II BBS Lines: 53 > Does anyone at C= have *any* idea of how close Commodore is to reaching > a burn=in date to commit 2.0 to ROM? I heard that it was recent that they were getting close - I saw a developer version that said "This is REALLY CLOSE so if you don't report problems now, then it will be too late in three days." > The last I heard, someone at CA decided to add a couple of new > features to WB. I dont think features are what people want; what > people want is for software to actually *work* under 2.0. Until > it hits ROM, major software vendors wont take 2.0 seriously enough > to actually start *programming* under 2.0. In the developer version that I saw, there was a new product called Fountain which allowed for scalable fonts. That worked nicely. Also, the ability yo to close a window before all the icons or information from that drive is loaded. My developer friend says that so far, all the parts of this system are 100% reliable, and has not seen a guru in a long while. The new font system will be able to use the same fonts as PageStream, so the system and the publishing packages will be able to take advantage of the same fonts. That's something that will get us into the same market that Apple has been bragging about. > > And just because a piece of software is listed in the "2.0 Complaint > Software List", it doesnt mean it actually works under 2.0. Quite a > few pieces of software made to "work" under 2.0, simply doesn't. Until > 2.0 hits ROM, they simply wont take the time or effort. I do agree that not all software that runs under 2.0 uses all of it's features. Just ask the PageStream people about using SuperHires or Productivity and have the height-width ratio's look right. They never called me back and they laughed in my face at the World of Amiga. Some software will die under 2.0. That is true. Most of that software needed improvements anyway. Of the software that I run on my A3000, there is not one package that I miss using. I have found that the new productivity that I find in the 2.0 environment eclipses the need for using old software. My paint packages work, my good audio software works, my publisher kicks butt, my editors work, my utilities work, and there is more. The only complaint that people have about 2.0 is that they don't like having limitations or rules on what is done, and how it's done. Most well trained/taught programmers don't give this a second thought. It's the homebrew folks that have a steeper learning curve for programming. Keep in mind that an application to run under 2.0 and use it's abilities ot to it's best will have to not run under 1.3. Since the greater percentage of the user base for games and such is the A500, there will be a definite line drawn between power users and game players. That same line exists in the Mac and IBM worlds, and Commodore cannot have an ultra game machine and super multimedia/business platform in the same box and support them with one line of software. That would be too limiting.