Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!xanth!manes From: manes@cs.odu.edu (Mark Manes) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: A BIG apology and, hopefully, a useful suggestion... Summary: Someone give this guy a COBOL program to write... Message-ID: <8784@xanth.cs.odu.edu> Date: 8 May 89 03:13:20 GMT References: <14870@louie.udel.EDU> Reply-To: manes@cs.odu.edu (Mark Manes) Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk Va. Lines: 152 In article <14870@louie.udel.EDU> wzg91@ttacs1.ttu.edu (BROWN, KEVIN) writes: > > > >To the Amiga OS developers (and to the rest of the newsgroup: apologies for >my childish behavior. I feel really silly now): Continue to feel silly, as the flames are about to roll in.. >Your management calls the shots, so I guess there isn't a whole lot you as >developers can do, even though you may have a better understanding of the >situation than your management... This is where you should have said, "Thank you... The End" Oh well... > >I now understand and (partially) agree with your management's reasons for >the INITIAL version of AmigaDOS (time constraints for release of the >product), but I DON'T agree with the reasons for not FIXING the problem >(i.e., I don't agree with the priorities set by your management: >Autobooting, V1.2 of the OS, FFS, etc. taking priority over a rewrite of >AmigaDOS). The reason is that autobooting and FFS can both be accomplished >by a rewrite of AmigaDOS, with the added advantage that the current >limitations of AmigaDOS would be removed. While this might take longer >(and I say *might* because you wouldn't have to work around the existing >code to achieve your objectives), I feel the result would have been worth >the time. > It might help all of us to understand why you wish a re-write if you defined the problems with the current operating system, from a user perspective. As a user, I see where every improvement made by the operating system folks at C-A have been much needed, and in a couple cases almost too late. As a programmer, I too, wish the end of BCPL, however, as with all machines there are things that you must live with. It is not that big of a deal, certainly considering the 'Big Picture'. What limitation are you refering too? As far as taking longer, it is absolutely impossible. All developers would just die if Commodore-Amiga attempted a change in operating system. Far too much has already been spent, and is continuing to be spent to develop for AmigaDOS. There were almost a couple of murders for leaving Zorro-I expansion slots. You continue to switch time in your last sentence, are you talking past? PRESENT? OR WORSE FUTURE? Are you really recommending C-A dump AmigaDOS? or are you just wishing that they had back in 85? >Yes, rewriting AmigaDOS will introduce a host of new bugs, but 1.1 of the >OS had a number of bugs as it was, and I would hope, at least, that the >introduction of a rewrite of DOS would not have introduced any more bugs >Than already existed (though the bugs would certainly be of a different >nature). In any case, finding bugs is what beta testers are for! > Have you EVER written any code? Have you ever written a sentence? You can not compare the number of bugs in release 1.0 with a yet-to-be written OS. Tell me, how do your beta testers know what is a bug? Maybe it is a bug in your language that you are using? Maybe it is a bug in your assembler... You know you will have to write these things for your new DOS. Beta testing a operating system is no trivial matter, and one that requires a decent understanding of how things work, from the ground up. >Out of curiosity, how many people are actually acting as beta test sites >for new revisions of the OS? I suspect not nearly enough to get most of >the bugs worked out in a reasonably short period of time, though I really >can't say for sure. This may not have been a situation that you had much >control over initially, since there may not have been many people around to >act as beta test sites. With 1,000,000+ Amigas out there now, I don't >think that is a limitation any more. So the question is, are there now a >reasonable number of beta test sites? If not, then it seems that it should >be an easy problem to rectify. > I believe that every release of AmigaDOS is very well tested, as evidence, look at 1.3. 1.3 introduced many new things, and yes, there are a few bugs, but there is no code that is released that is absolutely bug free. I strongly believe that the C-A people have done a excellent job, when pressure must be high, in NOT releasing code before it is truly ready. >There are a LOT of people on comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.amiga.tech. I >would think that quite a number of them (myself included) would be willing >to act as beta-test sites, provided that it doesn't cost anything (and why >should it? Beta testers are providing a service for free, at least to the >best of my knowledge!). > A lot of people doeS not mean that there are a lot of people who are capiable of handling that job, your included in that group. As far as it costing, everything costs, time is the most expensive resource. >But since your hands are essentially tied by management (unless the >situation has changed, of course), I have a suggestion: why not release >information about the internal workings of the OS to those who are >interested and let THEM rewrite it? Many of them (myself included) would >probably be willing to do it for FREE! Already we have one person (Deven >[much rambling deleted] I am sure that all the virus-writers would love that. Let me hark back, if I remember correctly the IPC conversation went on for months and months, was there a conclusion? Only one, you can not design anything with a committee of thousands. At least that is my perception. Picture this: \ Commodore: good afternoon sir, how may I help (go ahead try to imagine) User: I am using WrapBench 4.6, why wont Baffleterm run? commodore: Oh, let me see, that is managed under the Wrap team, there are five folks hard at work at fixing that problem, the temporary fix is to hook a fast load cartidge.... It IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR COMMODORE TO SUPPORT USER-WRITTEN OPERATING SYSTEMS. IT IS CRAZY FOR THEM TO RELEASE CODE OR INTERNAL INFORMATION SO THAT VIRUS- WRITERS CAN HAVE A FIELD DAY. AND FINALLY THERE ARE DAMN FEW PROGRAMMERS WHO TRULY HAVE THE SKILL TO GET THE JOB DONE. clearing throat.. sorry... got excited.. >So what about it, guys? What's to stop you from taking this course of >action? It doesn't look like AmigaDOS will be rewritten in-house anyway >(at least not any time in the near future) so why NOT have it written >elsewhere??? And your management might like the idea, too, since you (the >Amiga OS people) could concentrate on what your management believes are the >priority items. In other words, C-A, what do you have to lose? > > How does crediability sound? Marketability? How about their business? The jobs at Commodore? How about the users of the Amiga? How about the developer of Amiga hardware and software? I know this is just a nightmare... C-A please please tell me you will not listen to this fella! also, btw, I would appreciate you not posting things like "I realize it is out of your hands.. " That implies they have NO SAY. I assure you, they have say. If they didn't you would have a computer without a CLI. > Kevin Brown > >Internet: wzg91@ttacs1.ttu.edu or Bitnet: WZG91@TTACS1 or > c8u00@ttacs1.ttu.edu C8U00@TTACS1 > >Snailnet: 4817 Saxon Voicenet: (806)742-4375 > Bellaire, TX 77401 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark D. Manes "In Amiga We Trust" manes@xanth.UUCP ===========================================================================