Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!psuvax1!burdvax!bpa!cbmvax!higgin
From: higgin@cbmvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: 1.2 Notes and a bug (kinda)
Message-ID: <395@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Jun-86 14:13:10 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbmvax.395
Posted: Thu Jun 12 14:13:10 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 17-Jun-86 05:40:51 EDT
References: <465@elmgate.UUCP> <357@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> <469@elmgate.UUCP>
Reply-To: higgin@cbmvax.UUCP (Paul Higginbottom)
Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA
Lines: 62

In article <469@elmgate.UUCP> jdg@elmgate.UUCP (Jeff Gortatowsky) writes:
>...
>My 1.2 beta2 has got alot more
>serious problems with it than bad distribution disks however.  It was not
>ready for beta testing. ... But my experiance with 1.2
>has been negative enough that I'm considering going back to 1.1 to continue
>development until I get a version of 1.2xx that at least works as well as
>1.1. Or at least doesn't cause new bugs in things that did work before.
>

My suggestion: develop under 1.1 and test under 1.2 if you REALLY need the
new functionality in the 1.2 OS.  As a Manx C user, I HAVE to continue
developing under 1.1 because it won't run on 1.2 (Manx's fault, not C-A's).

More seriously though, you should ask yourself whether 1.2 will be in
USERS's hands (i.e., officially released and available in stores) when your
commerciual product will be available.  It is my guess that 1.2 won't be
available in STORES until about November.  This is purely my opinion - I
might be way off base.

> <...numerous valid gripes on using 1.2 from a user's standpoint...>
>
>Forget about all the neat stuff for programmers for a moment. This is stuff
>the USER (ie. guy who buys the programs we write) is going to do. This is
>the stuff that MUST BE ROCK SOLID!!!!!! THIS IS THE PART OF THE AMIGA THAT
>MUST BE INTUITIVE!! Remember? Intuition.  It must work regularly and
>predictabily EVERYTIME. No matter what the user does.

This I don't necessarily agree with.  You're correct in saying the user must
never see an OS's bugs, but C-A is trying to do its best to see that they
respond to developer's needs, wishes, and whims, which is refreshing.
The 'user' problems are a given - I'm sure C-A knows what they have to fix
up, and that's why beta1.2 goes to developers and not users - to those who
NEED the enhancements which are in response to their needs, wishes and whims.

>So the solution.  Forget about my and other
>programmers wish list for the moment. Concentrate ALL efforts on bomb
>proofing the USER's view of AmigaDOS/Intuition as supplied.  We programmers
>will live without for a while.  What WE need to sell our wares is USER's.
>Preferably a user who is not frustrated everytime he sits down at the
>machine.
>

Ah, but what Commodore needs is good software, so it must take care of the
developers first!  You can't have users without good software, and as you
said, 1.1 is pretty solid, and so user's won't be complaining right now
about the user-interface - they will be SCREAMING for Lotus-123, Excel,
Word, Symphony, dBase, etc!!!!

>BTW. What this programmer really needs is a stable environment. So that I
>know at least 95% of whatever goes BOOM in my code is MY code.
>Sorry once again for the size of this posting.
>

I'm sure using developing with CLI and DOS like usual is still pretty ok
under 1.2.  There are people at CBM doing it, I know.  Maybe it's just
workbench that has problems.

        Regards,
                Paul Higginbottom

Disclaimer: I do not work for Commodore and my opinions are at least my own.