Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!stpeter!cmcmanis
From: cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: SIMMs for the STE
Summary: don't read this please.
Keywords: SIMM, STE,
Message-ID: <132825@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 90 02:47:27 GMT
References: <2703@erix.ericsson.se> <2069@atari.UUCP> <2668@castle.ed.ac.uk> <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis)
Followup-To: alt.flame
Distribution: na
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Lines: 20

In article <4592@brahma.cs.hw.ac.uk> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes:
> Unless Atari say so officially then nothing is guaranteed.

Hmm, "As-is" Software might be the name of a successful software business. :-)
Is it possible to even write software with what Atari has said "Offically" ?
Can someone detail the canonical list of things that Atari has said 
"officially"?

Lets see :
	The DevKit - Ok, but not all of it is applicable to the ST.
	How to parse command line arguments.
	What to use to avoid the 40 folder bug.

My impression is that most of what Atari say's officially is what you can't
do and not what you can do. Maybe that is part of the problem no?

--Chuck McManis
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis   BIX: cmcmanis  Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
"If it didn't have bones in it, it wouldn't be crunchy now would it?!"