Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!cory.Berkeley.EDU!navas From: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Faith in the Amiga Message-ID: <21636@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 1 Feb 90 05:34:13 GMT References: <02030.AA02030@sosaria> <5487@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM> <5501@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM> Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU Reply-To: navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (David C. Navas) Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 22 In article <5501@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM> wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne C Knapp) writes: >The problem mainly is that if you go down any of these paths >it can be a great solution for yourself but how many other people will have >the same solution so that you have customers to sell your software too? > > Wayne Knapp [I can't believe I'm responding to this thread...] Isn't this the same argument used to say that developing for RenderMan [or whatever it was] on the IBM was pretty pointless too....??? If the software is *real* good, maybe you could talk to the manufacturers of the hardware and cut some kind of deal... And now, don't we have a problem with this kind of argument anyway? No one buys the hardware cause there ain't no software, and no one writes the software, because no one has bought the hardware... I thought the Amiga community was beyond such arguments [we all took a risk buying the machine, and many of us are taking a risk developing for it...]? David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu