Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!cbmvax!andy From: andy@cbmvax.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: AmigaWorld Expo cancelled (Flames ahead) Message-ID: <1930@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> Date: Tue, 26-May-87 16:00:19 EDT Article-I.D.: cbmvax.1930 Posted: Tue May 26 16:00:19 1987 Date-Received: Wed, 27-May-87 06:43:13 EDT References: <6648@amdahl.amdahl.com> <306@osupyr.UUCP> <1044@pinney.munsell.UUCP> <142@l5comp.UUCP> Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) Distribution: world Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 102 Keywords: flames In article <142@l5comp.UUCP> scotty@l5comp.UUCP (Scott Turner) writes: It feels like Monday. Warning, flames ahead. (This will get a bit hot...) >I figured out in November '86 that the only way I was going to get any REAL >changes made on my Amiga was if I made them. This was partly triggered by my >experiences with getting bugs fixed by C-A tech support (The CATS crowd). I >found that if I wanted the bug fixed it was best to fix it myself and then >call Andy and say "Andy, there's this move.l d1,... in trackdisk.device you >might want to fix". Well, the bugs you reported were fixed. All I asked for was code that demonstrated the problems you were having. Remember, you were asking for instant turnaround. Rather than wait for me to verify your bugs by writing a program that tried to do what you were asking, it would have been easier if you sent me what you were talking about. But you never did manage to actually send me any examples. So, while I appreciated the extra effort you went to, just sending me the code that demonstrated the bug would have been enough. If you called Andy and said "Andy, the UPDATE command in >trackdisk.device causes a guru #3 when updateing to a WP'd disk" lord only >knows when I would have seen a fix. (The bug had been there since 1.0) Guess that's why you didn't report it. Have you reported it yet ? Still time for V1.3.. We get a fair number of bug reports. Sample code that shows the problem always helps. Otherwise, we have to write it before we can look at the bug. Presumably, if you've found the bug, you have something written. If its too much trouble for you to even send it in, then how can you expect special treatment ? (BTW, we did send you a couple of kickstarts with the bugs you reported fixed, right ?) Now that you have email, its even easier to send in bug reports. > >So now I don't call CATS when I have a problem. I filed the application for the >new developers program in the circular file when it came in. best not to call, then :-) >When something >bites me again and again and again (like the sorry collection of amigadog >library calls) I just knuckle down and find a solution. Well, this is one way to ensure that the bugs you find will never be fixed. (unless someone else finds them; nice guy) >When was the last time you got any source to some piece of the >Amiga from CATS? I don't mean some program they've hacked together, I mean Legal and upper management have their own reasons for keeping source confidential. Personally, my reason is this: We don't want people mucking around with the internals of the Amiga libraries and devices. Not only does this create a support nightmare when talking to developers, it causes a support nightmare when talking to users. And it makes upgrading the OS almost impossible. "But I saved 12 cycles by knowing that A6 held ExecBase, and A3 held GraphicBase", or the ever popular "I knew the routine used 123 bytes of stack, so that's how much I gave it." Sorry if you don't like the reasoning. >something like serial.device (Apple gave theirs away!) Well now I use MCC's >disasm and MAKE my own source code for disk based stuff and make it do what I >want (relabel RAM:, tuned parallel.device etc etc etc.) Results come MUCH >quicker than begging C-A to make them. How long have we waited to relabel RAM:? >Since version 1.0? I wait no longer. Don't ask me to mail it to you either, its >clear that C-A is feeling over protective these days. Recoding BCPL object is >a bitch, but I expect to have a ram-handler that I can give away that will be >smaller, faster(!), and relabelable later this summer that I can give away. >You can log into GEnie and grab my tuned/debugged parallel.device though. :) Now, this *is* interesting. What you are announcing is that you took the C-A parallel.device (which is written in assembler), disassembled it, made a few changes, and are distributing it ? Did you get permission ? Is this type of thing legal ? [A side note: assuming you did not get permission; you may have, but this isn't the first time something like this has happened...Is it especially intelligent to announce that you have done something like this in a forum that you know the copyright owner reads ??? And now probably is going to have to respond to in some fashion, like checking the whole thing out ?] Diasssembling a program, then reassembling it with a few changes does not make it yours. I'm not a lawyer, but I didn't think copyright laws had changed that much. The intelligent thing to do would have been to say to us, hey, the following changes in the parallel.device will do XXX for you. And, if you were correct, it would have found its way into the next release. But nooooooo. > >To paraphrase that great American "Ask not what Commodore can do for you, but >rather what you can do for yourself". Cause baby, Commodore ain't gonna do JACK >for you! > Speaking of which, I never did receive a copy of the program you were working on. >Scott Turner -- andy finkel {ihnp4|seismo|allegra}!cbmvax!andy Commodore/Amiga "An end is always a new beginning." - Captain Cloud Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.