Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: 520STFM recommendation for Atari
Message-ID: <820@looking.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Jun-87 20:31:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: looking.820
Posted: Sun Jun 28 20:31:28 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Jun-87 02:37:20 EDT
References: <5330001@hpccc.HP.COM>
Reply-To: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd. Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 26

In article <5330001@hpccc.HP.COM> blevins@hpccc.HP.COM (David Blevins) writes:
>My main reservation about this machine is Atari's "attitude" towards its
>users and developers.  I read something this weekend about Atari "not
>wanting a 1040 to be hooked up to a TV and used as a game machine" or some
>such rot.  I believe that the CUSTOMER will determine what he wants to do
>with his computer, and doesn't need Atari's marketing dept. forcing him
>to use the machine only for REAL applications.

It's true that it's up to the customer, but this doesn't change the fact
that the games are the worst thing to happen to the Atari, and that if
the machine fizzles out, it will be due, in part, to the games.

While Atari couldn't realisticly require developers buying the machine to
sign licences stating they will not develop games, it would probably be
a good idea.

The Atari has better hardware than the Mac or Mac Plus.  Yet it is still
perceived by many to be a games machine, while nobody perceives the Mac
as one.  If there are lots of games, and any customers are buying the
machines "to play games" then a games machine perception develops.
The better the games are, the worse it is.  Who ever heard of somebody
buying an IBM or Mac to play games.  Yes, there are many games available
for these machines, but nobody thinks of them as the raison d'etre of
the machine line.
-- 
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473