Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.misc:3849 comp.sys.amiga.programmer:3799 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!widener!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!convex.cl.msu.edu!jap From: jap@convex.cl.msu.edu (Joe Porkka) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: So, how close is WB2.0 to a burn-in date? Message-ID: <1991May22.145109.2627@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> Date: 22 May 91 14:51:09 GMT Article-I.D.: msuinfo.1991May22.145109.2627 References: <1991May20.170355.19033@coplex.uucp> Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu Organization: Michigan State University Lines: 22 johns@dworkin.Amber.COM (John Silvia) writes: >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. Programs can easily check to see what version of rom you have. If you don't have 2.0 they can still function, but you would lose a few of the nifty features that require 2.0. All it takes is a little thought on the programmers part, and a few ghosted menus (or gadgets, whatever). 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.