Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.misc:3857 comp.sys.amiga.programmer:3807 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!jonabbey From: jonabbey@cs.utexas.edu (Jonathan David Abbey) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: So, how close is WB2.0 to a burn-in date? Message-ID: <345@atacama.cs.utexas.edu> Date: 22 May 91 18:01:05 GMT References: <1991May22.145109.2627@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> <1991May22.161900.26502@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX Lines: 30 In article <1991May22.161900.26502@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: | In article <1991May22.145109.2627@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> | jap@convex.cl.msu.edu (Joe Porkka) writes: | > | >There is no reason not to have 2.0 on all amigas (including CDTV). | >The only difference between game players and power users is the hardware | >and software addons they buy for their machines. | | That's not really true. CDTV, running under a variant of | 1.3, uses a 512K kickstart with special routines on it, so you | can't just plug in a 2.0 kickstart. And considering that 2.0KS is | already totally filled, there would be no room for the CDTV | specific code. Does anyone know if Commodore has made any statements to the effect that software developed for the CDTV should be 2.0 compatible? I realize that it will may be non-trivial to field upgrade CDTV's to 2.0 software ("They want us to take in our CDTV? Why? It works fine.."), but it would be nice to have 2.0 facilities (particularly fountain) in doing information retrieval, not to mention general stability. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan David Abbey \"Fortune presents gifts not according to the the university of texas at austin \ book" - Dead Can Dance "I've got to computer science/math?/psychology? \ jonabbey@cs.utexas.edu stay Awake..."