dkletter@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (10/07/88)
To Mr. Brian Fox:
I find it quite hard to believe that someone who can WRITE can't seem to
COMPREHEND. I can't believe that you have the nerve to jump on Joe Craparotta
after Rich has the NERVE to accuse Joe of being a THIEF for no particular
reason.
There are other people on this net that haven't been able to get AEPro
emulation working properly, including myself. I have the manual. Joe
Craparotta has the manual. Other people have the manual. They haven't been
able to get the program working. Why? Is it that we're all IGNORANT? STUPID,
to coin a popular phrase? Are we?
JOE ASKED TO END THE TOPIC. WHY ARE YOU CLOGGING UP THE NET?
In general:
I don't know who elected Mr. Fox and Mr. Sims as censors of this network,
to decide what is "trash" and what isn't. Frankly, if they don't like what
is said they can go take a walk. Maybe I'll start accusing them of stealing
things and maybe breaking and entering. We'll see if they're "civil".
ProTERM:
I like ProTERM because I don't need a manual. Maybe that's why other
people on here like it too. The macro system, terminal emulation, editor,
and configuration are powerful yet easy to use. The wide variety of protocols
far surpasses that of either AE Pro or MouseTalk. It also takes advantage
of my GS memory, which neither does, and has a full ProDOS command set,
something that AE Pro users cried for years about.
Frankly, I'm disgusted. I disagree with Morgan Davis about a few things,
but I'd like to thank him for remaining somewhat professional.
dkletter@athena.mit.edurich@pro-exchange.cts.COM (Rich Sims) (10/07/88)
I had hoped this was ended, but apparently it's not. >From: pnet01!crash!athena.mit.edu!dkletter > > I find it quite hard to believe that someone who can WRITE can't seem to >COMPREHEND. I can't believe that you have the nerve to jump on Joe Craparotta >after Rich has the NERVE to accuse Joe of being a THIEF for no particular >reason. I did not accuse anyone of being a thief. Please do not attribute to me any statements that I haven't made. If you have been following (and actually *reading*) the 'thread' of this group of messages you will recall that what I said was: >>Second, the comment concerning folks with a *legitimate* copy of AE Pro is >>justified.... it's a complex program, but once you get the manual... and >>take the time to *read* it.... you can do all the things that have earned AE >>such high marks from reviewers for so many years. I stand by that statement, in it's entirety. AE Pro was (and may still be) one of the most heavily "pirated" programs in the Apple world, and it is certainly a complex program. Those statements are not conjecture, but are based on a number of years of contact with Apple owners in a formal "support" capacity. --- As a side note, if anyone else, including Joe Craparotta, interpreted that as an accusation that he was "a thief", let me assure you that I did not intend it that way, nor do I see how it could be interpreted as such, in view of the comments by Joe and Morgan, which preceded it. --- > I don't know who elected Mr. Fox and Mr. Sims as censors of this network, >to decide what is "trash" and what isn't. Frankly, if they don't like what >is said they can go take a walk. I'm not sure what prompted that comment... I do not recall making any statements concerning "trash", the quality of any program, or the quality or content of any messages. The balance of the message I posted simply said that I found no problem getting AE Pro's emulation to work, (perhaps I should have added "within the limits of the Apple's hardware", but that's hindsight) and suggested that perhaps the problem did not originate with the program. >Frankly, I'm disgusted. You're not alone, there! If you (or any other reader of this group) wishes to take me to task for something I've posted, please have the courtesy to at least refer to something I've said, not to something fabricated out of thin air. Further, I'd suggest that "flames" such as the one that prompted this message would be more appropriately transmitted via private mail facilities. ----- I read this group because there are frequently messages containing useful and interesting information. If I have any information to add to a discussion, or an opinion to offer (including a "difference of opinion"), I intend to do so. Further, I try to do it in a rational manner, and to refrain from either "name calling" or unfounded accusations/statements. If that's not acceptable, then so be it... I don't plan on changing any time in the near future. As a final note, to those of you who are getting tired of this subject (and I suspect there are quite a few), I apologize for posting this publicly, but I felt it was necessary, if for no other reason than to make it clear that I did not intend my earlier message to be considered as any sort of "accusation" of any particular individual. "Talent does what it can, genius does what it must. I do what I get paid to do!" UUCP: [ sdcsvax nosc ] !crash!pro-exchange!rich || pro-exchange: 305/431-3203 ARPA: crash!pro-exchange!rich@nosc.mil || 300/1200/2400/9600 (HST) INET: rich@pro-exchange.cts.com || login = 'register'
SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (10/11/88)
>>after Rich has the NERVE to accuse Joe of being a THIEF for no particular >>reason. > >I did not accuse anyone of being a thief. Please do not attribute to me any >statements that I haven't made. By suggesting that Joe did not have a manual, you implied he was using pirate software. Most developers consider piracy the equivalent of theft (although copyright violation is *legally* a civil offense, us non-lawyers aren't prone to such fine distinctions). I doubt Joe appreciated an unfounded accusation of piracy any more than he'd like being called a thief. >>>Second, the comment concerning folks with a *legitimate* copy of AE Pro is >>>justified.... it's a complex program, but once you get the manual... and >>>take the time to *read* it.... you can do all the things that have earned AE >>>such high marks from reviewers for so many years. AE Pro isn't the only vendor guilty of a turgid manual. I have one, and I DID read it. After I FINALLY figured out how to get an ADM3A emulation to work the manual actually did make some sense. It wasn't very helpful BEFORE I knew how to make an emulation work (I've read LOTS of mainframe manuals, and they're usually even worse). >I stand by that statement, in it's entirety. AE Pro was (and may still be) >one of the most heavily "pirated" programs in the Apple world, and it is >certainly a complex program. Those statements are not conjecture, but are >based on a number of years of contact with Apple owners in a formal >"support" capacity. It simply doesn't follow that anyone who complains about the program hasn't got a manual. AE Pro may or may not be pirated more frequently than, say Choplifter (for which owning a manual isn't nearly so necessary ;-), but United Software must be selling SOME copies to SOMEBODY (else how do they manage to stay in business?). >As a side note, if anyone else, including Joe Craparotta, interpreted that >as an accusation that he was "a thief", let me assure you that I did not >intend it that way... How about not accusing anyone of piracy without evidence either? >that I found no problem getting AE Pro's emulation to work, (perhaps I should >have added "within the limits of the Apple's hardware", but that's hindsight) An objective question might be preferrable to evaluative commentary. I suspect that Joe is plenty smart enough to activate AE Pro's emulations. I believe his complaint is that some (many, all?) of the emulations do not exactly mimic ALL of the ESC code sequences produced by the REAL terminals emulated. I work with a host that is EXTREMELY forgiving of incomplete emulations, so I'm not in a position to discover many weaknesses in emulations (for instance Kermit's VT100 always worked fine on our system, although early versions wouldn't survive vttest, and a number of people using unix editors made a number of specific bug reports). AE Pro's ADM3, Televideo 9xx, etc. emulations work ok on our host (not as nicely as a good VT-100, however). > ...Further, I'd suggest >that "flames" such as the one that prompted this message would be more >appropriately transmitted via private mail facilities. I recall something about black pots and kettles? Maybe it was "Do unto others..." [The Far Side shall return (I hope)] Murph Sewall Sewall@UCONNVM.BITNET Business School sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu [INTERNET] U of Connecticut {rutgers psuvax1 ucbvax & in Europe - mcvax} !UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL [UUCP] -+- My employer isn't responsible for my mistakes AND vice-versa! (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited) "Close enough for government work" - source unknown (naturally ;-)