Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!ece-csc!mcnc!xanth!nic.MR.NET!shamash!nis!sialis!orbit!pnet51!shawn
From: shawn@pnet51.cts.com (Shawn Stanley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: why, why, why
Message-ID: <269@orbit.UUCP>
Date: 4 Nov 88 21:45:09 GMT
Sender: root@orbit.UUCP
Organization: People-Net [pnet51], Minneapolis, MN.
Lines: 76

GUIDO@FSU.BITNET (---------the sacred personified---------) writes:
>ok, this will most likely be either ignored or start a flame to end all
>flames, but explain to me why I can go into a software store and count
>the number of IIgs specific titles on hands and toes(excluding educational
>software which ceased being usefull after I left high-school)  and yet,
>my roommate who has an atari ST has racks upon racks of some of the best
>software I have ever seen.  my meager library is contains nothing I could

Oh my.  Well, you'll find that a lot of Amiga software was developed in C,
and since Manx Software Systems and Lattice decided to put their efforts into
Amiga C compilers, stuff has been ported from some micros to others faster
than is currently possible with the //gs.  There's an Aztec C compiler for
the //e & //gs, although it runs in 8-bit mode only, and has bugs that Manx
hasn't been interested in fixing.  There's the APW C compiler for the //gs
which is pretty good, only the slow linking and large binaries could be
obstacles for some developers.  However, TML Pascal is supposed to be quick
and small(er), and there are some impressive compiled BASIC adaptations
available.

>oreinted software I have is Thexder.  I am disgusted, I bought this
>machine because my II+ finally died and I was assured that pounds of
>new software would come out for it 'this christmas' and so far I have been
>waiting for about a year. (note: 'this christmas refers to xmas 87)

You were assured?  You should know by now that dealers will say anything to
make a quick buck.  Don't trust them entirely.  Use your own judgement and do
some research instead of relying totally on their information.

>I have not learned enough about 65816 programming to do my own yet, and
>TML pascal is starting to be an option, but I have no idea where to start.

The best way to break into 65816 programming, as far as I'm concerned, is by
buying Byteworks' Orca/M assembler & development environment software.  Follow
their examples, buy a 65816 assembly programming book, and get copies of the
Toolbox Reference manuals.  A ProDOS 16 reference manual wouldn't hurt,
either.  TML Pascal will be easier and cheaper to get into... get their
software and follow their examples, and you'll be up and running before you
know it.

>I bought this machine becuase of it's amazing graphics and superb sound
>capabilities, but so far, it seems to me that I should have bought an
>ST.  There are very few things that I can do on my GS that cannot be done
>on an ST.  the reverse is not true at all.  I am sure, of course, that much
>of the problem lies in the slow(is 2.5mhz slow?) chip speed, but so what.

I've heard that it's hard to become an ST guru.  Don't be mislead by fancy
demos!  If you have friends that own an ST, judge their experience and
abilities with the machine before deciding you'd have a better time with it. 
By the way, speed is indeed a factor these days, but you have to watch what
you're getting for that speed.  Some of the newer machines have to run faster
because of the amazing overhead of the operating system and the user
interface.  A faster //gs would be nice (there are accelerator cards coming
out RealSoonNow), but then you can run programs on it right now without
speeding it up and adding 4-8 meg of memory.  Cost is sometimes hidden in the
"basic hardware requirements".

>I saw some pretty amazing stuff on the old II+ before it entered the
>silicon graveyard...stuff that was not as graphically good, but the ideas
>could have been expanded to the GS and made even better...seems to me that
>all the good software programmers have gone to other avenues.  I guess now
>I can have fun figuring out GS/OS for a while and then...who knows what
>other potentially boring bit of system software will come out.  It seems
>to me that the developers spend more time writing system stuff for the
>third-party developers to use than they do explaining to the common user

There's a lot of development software out for the //gs, which is more than you
can say for the older //'s.  Developers are working on development software to
get YOU developing faster and easier.  In many different ways, too.  Consider
the latest word processor (although that might be an understatement),
Workbench.  It's a writer's tool, all the way through.  There are the many
programming languages appearing, plus all the programmer support through
various Apple // magazines.  Hey, I've been writing up a storm myself with my
BBS.

UUCP: {rosevax, crash}!orbit!pnet51!shawn
INET: shawn@pnet51.cts.com