Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!husc6!necntc!ames!ptsfa!ihnp4!upba!eecae!nancy!usenet
From: usenet@nancy.UUCP (Usenet file owner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: GemDraw GemWrite
Message-ID: <81@nancy.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Sep-87 02:17:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: nancy.81
Posted: Tue Sep 15 02:17:24 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Sep-87 06:40:42 EDT
References: <2182@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: koster@msudoc.UUCP
Organization: The Happy Humpers Association for the Preservation of
Lines: 38

Followup-To:


Mutated Waterfowl
Keywords: missing defunct why?
From: koster@msudoc.ee.mich-state.edu (Kurt Koster)
Path: msudoc!koster

In article <2182@ihlpf.ATT.COM> rtb@ihlpf.ATT.COM (Todd) writes:
>
>
>It seems obvious now that Gemwrite and GemDraw will never be
>available for the ST. I am posting this article because
>I am curious. Does anybody have any theories as to why these
>two programs died on the vine? It should have really easy
>for the programmers at DR to port it over from the IBM code.
>They had the source, the knowledge of GEM, the manuals
>written, and it shouldn't have been that big of a project. I suspect
>it was part of the Apple-DR agreement of a couple of years ago
>over the "look and feel" issues. I would think DR would take a new interest
>in the ST because OS/2 with its presentation manager and  the newer
>versions of Windows are going to take their toll on the PC sales of
>GEM.
>
>						R.T. Bradstrum

Yes, there's a reason.

GemDraw and GemWrite aren't that good.  With 1st Word and Neochrome
[the versions included with the ST] being better programs, Digital
Research wisely decided not to attempt marketing either.

There was also a slight matter of Digital Research and Atari not getting
along well together at the time.

At least, I think this is the way things went.  Perhaps someone else can
further enlighten the issue?

-koster

{ihnp4!msudoc!koster}