jer@stbimbo.UUCP (John Ramspott) (08/29/90)
I have been a little disturbed over some of the Lattice/SAS flaming going on. They have been producing their compiler from the very beginning, when you could fit all the Amiga developers into a VolksWagen. They have stayed with it through unstable Amiga OS's, unstable Commodore, new machines, competition from Aztec, and flaming from the net. Face it folks, they helped get the Amiga where it is today. I think it is about time they made money off their Amiga products. I remember the flaky 1.0 compiler, and was thrilled to finally get the "Yellow manual" to explain it all. The product has come a long way, survived a lot, and now supports the newest OS. Folks, look around. $40 for a major compiler upgrade is peanuts. This is professional software, and the market is much smaller than what exists for IBM PC's (thus no Borland Turbo products). Regardless of how your clients use their Amiga (graphics, sound, multimedia, checkbook balancing, etc), you can make money with the Lattice C compiler. From games to accounting software, it can produce it all. The Amiga is the best machine out there, but the reality of it is that it practically is a vertical market from a professoinal point of view. I think the compiler is amazingly cheap, and provides an editor, debugger, and Unix tools (grep, find, etc) that on the PC you pay a great deal more for. As for the 900 number, who says YOU have to use it? For people to take the Amiga seriously as a development system, they must have access to immediate technical support. Microsoft charges for ONLINE and other services, and then frequently answer questions with "Gee, I don't know". Companies who write software gladly pay for technical support. TIME IS MONEY. For those of you who aren't computer professionals, use BIX or Snail Mail. For that matter, post to the net. They aren't trying to cut you off, but they are trying to provide immediate support to those whose livelihood depends on it. I for one am glad to see this level of support coming to the Amiga. Ami is growing up. OK, now the bad news. There is one thing that Lattice has done that needs to be fixed. They have not supported their C++ compiler!!! Hello SAS? Do you remember the product? It's a great language, and the original translator proved itself to be useful and fascinating. C++ is quickly becoming the language of choice, especially where GUI development is concerned. But there hasn't been a single update in 2 years. It is still based on cfront 1.1, which is now up to 2.1! I can get either a 2.1 compiler or translator for every platform but an Amiga, and that is very sad. The Amiga is an ideal candidate for C++ development. I for one don't mind it being a translator. I like being able to update the C compiler part independently of the C++ part. And after all, the AT&T product on which all C++ work is based is a translator too (unless this has changed recently). I want SAS to update their C++ product, and treat it like a real product as they do the C compiler. Wake up dudes, the C++ market is GROWING rapidly. And yes, I will happily pay for the upgrade. In conclusion, I wish SAS well in taking over the compiler efforts. By and large they have done very good work for the Amiga industry, and they hung in there during the lean years. It is payoff time. I hope they make enough dough off C compiler upgrades and the 900 number to work on that C++ product too! Sorry for the tirade folks, but I hate to see good guys get attacked by people out of touch with economics (the need to pay employees salaries, need to pay rent, pay electric, etc.). I would very much like a SAS/Lattice person to tell us all when we can expect to see updated C++ products. My checkbook is waiting...
dylan@cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) (08/29/90)
In article <113@stbimbo.UUCP> jer@stbimbo.UUCP (John Ramspott) writes: >I have been a little disturbed over some of the Lattice/SAS flaming going on. Me too. I just ordered my 5.10 yesterday. Lattice has a great product, well documented, frequently updated with copious improvements and features added at almost every turn. I agree with John that without this compiler, the Amiga wouldn't be where it is. But the competition with Manx helped matters immensely. (Lattice C was pretty poor before Aztec came on the scene.) As for the $2/minute fee. I think that's fine (or even cheap) for being able to talk to a competent Human about problems. However, those of us on Usenet have 1000's of competent people to ask questions of. For things like patches to fix bugs and all (like the 5.02->5.04 upgrade) charging that much is pretty scary. Especially in the 5.02 case, where there were copies of 5.02 that broke the patch. At 2400 baud, $2/minute get's mighty expensive. > >OK, now the bad news. There is one thing that Lattice has done that needs to >be fixed. They have not supported their C++ compiler!!! Hello SAS? Do you When I ordered, I asked the person on the phone (Diane Gomez) about the new C++. She distinctly said 2nd quarter '91. So now they're talking about it. It will be good. dylan
eeh@public.BTR.COM (Eduardo E. Horvath eeh@btr.com) (08/30/90)
In article <113@stbimbo.UUCP> jer@stbimbo.UUCP (John Ramspott) writes: [ SAS C 5.10 stuff deleted ] >OK, now the bad news. There is one thing that Lattice has done that needs to >be fixed. They have not supported their C++ compiler!!! Hello SAS? Do you >remember the product? It's a great language, and the original translator >proved itself to be useful and fascinating. C++ is quickly becoming the >language of choice, especially where GUI development is concerned. But there >hasn't been a single update in 2 years. It is still based on cfront 1.1, which >is now up to 2.1! I can get either a 2.1 compiler or translator for every >platform but an Amiga, and that is very sad. The Amiga is an ideal candidate >for C++ development. I for one don't mind it being a translator. I like >being able to update the C compiler part independently of the C++ part. And >after all, the AT&T product on which all C++ work is based is a translator >too (unless this has changed recently). I want SAS to update their C++ >product, and treat it like a real product as they do the C compiler. Wake up >dudes, the C++ market is GROWING rapidly. And yes, I will happily pay for the >upgrade. > AMEN!!! And please make CodePRobe recognize C++ source files! ---- My keyboard's back from the garage. ========================================================================= Eduardo Horvath eeh@btr.com ..!{decwrl,mips,fernwood}!btr!eeh "Trust me, I am cognizant of what I am doing." - Hammeroid =========================================================================
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (08/30/90)
dylan@june.cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes: > jer@stbimbo.UUCP (John Ramspott) writes: >>I have been a little disturbed over some of the Lattice/SAS flaming going on. > >As for the $2/minute fee. I think that's fine (or even cheap) for >being able to talk to a competent Human about problems. However, those >of us on Usenet have 1000's of competent people to ask questions of. >For things like patches to fix bugs and all (like the 5.02->5.04 upgrade) >charging that much is pretty scary. Especially in the 5.02 case, where >there were copies of 5.02 that broke the patch. At 2400 baud, $2/minute >get's mighty expensive. OK, I'm confused. Is the $2/min the voice support or the BBS support? (By the way, the fact that you might have USENet access has exactly nothing to do with how SAS prices their support calls! Why would you expect them to know, or to offer you a different price?) >>OK, now the bad news. There is one thing that Lattice has done that needs to >>be fixed. They have not supported their C++ compiler!!! Hello SAS? Do you > >When I ordered, I asked the person on the phone (Diane Gomez) about the >new C++. She distinctly said 2nd quarter '91. So now they're talking >about it. It will be good. Well, that's not exactly great news, since equally "authoritative" reports here earlier this month had a C++ upgrade coming out October '90. Either they are having bad problems with it, or they have backtracked to release a 2.1 language revision product instead of a 2.0 product. Their total lack of progress over the long term that other vendors have been supplying a 2.0 product doesn't look any better than it did before, and the steadily retreating issue date looks like more of the same. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> -- Severely disenchanted Lattice C++ R1.0 owner.
nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) (08/31/90)
In article <1990Aug30.125917.18354@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > dylan@june.cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes: > > > > . . . . . . . . . At 2400 baud, $2/minute > >get's mighty expensive. > > OK, I'm confused. Is the $2/min the voice support or the BBS support? > > Kent, the man from xanth. The $2/min was for voice support (on a 1-900 number). They are 'contemplating' the use of a BBS, according the information I received. ---Mike, "Being a Seattle Mariners fan makes me look forward to Football season." -- A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg DSAC-FSD "However," replied the Universe, | DLA Systems Automation Center "The fact has not created in me a | Columbus, Ohio sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil CIS: 73777,360
jdege@ (Jeff Dege) (09/01/90)
In article <2449@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil> nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) writes: >In article <1990Aug30.125917.18354@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >> dylan@june.cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes: >> > >> > . . . . . . . . . At 2400 baud, $2/minute >> >get's mighty expensive. >> OK, I'm confused. Is the $2/min the voice support or the BBS support? >> >> Kent, the man from xanth. > > The $2/min was for voice support (on a 1-900 number). They are jtoebes announced on Bix last night that the 1-900 number was toast. Support will be continued via the usual support line (area code 70? something.) ------------------------------ - - - -
sysop@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) (09/03/90)
In article <1990Aug30.125917.18354@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > dylan@june.cs.washington.edu (Dylan McNamee) writes: .... > >As for the $2/minute fee. I think that's fine (or even cheap) for > >being able to talk to a competent Human about problems. However, those > >of us on Usenet have 1000's of competent people to ask questions of. > >For things like patches to fix bugs and all (like the 5.02->5.04 upgrade) > >charging that much is pretty scary. Especially in the 5.02 case, where > >there were copies of 5.02 that broke the patch. At 2400 baud, $2/minute > >get's mighty expensive. > > OK, I'm confused. Is the $2/min the voice support or the BBS support? The only time I call companies when dealing with compilers and libraries (like in my work situation) is when there is some very technical problem where the solution is not obvious. If it were my company paying, I might not mind so much, but if it's my hobby, I don't think that can be justified. I realize that if a lot of people call and keep the technical support people on the phone for many minutes at a time, then they can't get other work done, and that costs real $$$. I don't know if there is an easy answer to it. (What do people usually call Lattice for, anyway, that requires the $2/min? I mean, what kind of questions generate the traffic?) > > (By the way, the fact that you might have USENet access has exactly > nothing to do with how SAS prices their support calls! Why would you > expect them to know, or to offer you a different price?) I thought Dylan meant that you can get free "support" here on USENET, by asking your questions here, and tapping the knowledge of "1000's of competent people," not from Lattice. > .... > >new C++. She distinctly said 2nd quarter '91. So now they're talking > >about it. It will be good. > > Well, that's not exactly great news, since equally "authoritative" reports > here earlier this month had a C++ upgrade coming out October '90. > > Either they are having bad problems with it, or they have backtracked > to release a 2.1 language revision product instead of a 2.0 product. > > Their total lack of progress over the long term that other vendors have > been supplying a 2.0 product doesn't look any better than it did before, > and the steadily retreating issue date looks like more of the same. > What is the actual problem? Is it that the current version 1 of cfront isn't good enough for your use? (This isn't a flame, it's a real question! :-) I have heard that not a whole lot was added to 2.0, mostly multiple-inheritance, which apparently isn't absolutely necessary for most things. Or, is it the current implementation that you feel needs improvement? (BTW, I have Lattice C++; is there a way I can upgrade to use the 5.x version of the C compiler with this?) Of course, I'm all for an improvement, and would probably pay some reasonable amount for an upgrade to version 2.x. > Kent, the man from xanth. > <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> > -- > Severely disenchanted Lattice C++ R1.0 owner. Well, I'm not disenchanted, but maybe that's because I'm still learning C++, and haven't gotten to a point where I should be disenchanted. :-) So far, I'm still enchanted. ;-) I'm trying to put together a simple program to help me get the hang of it; I'm thinking about a game. I'd like to see a discussion on how to encapsulate things like the joystick code, and other design considerations. I think I have a pretty good idea of what I need to do, but I need to type in (ugh) the joystick code, and attempt to make a good use of classes. Maybe I should try it using mostly conventional methods, and add classes later as I get the hang of it. (Not everything needs to be in classes anyway.) You know, this would be a good topic for a "programmers newsletter." Did that thing ever come about? I hadn't noticed any mention of it in a long while. (I'm sure putting together such a thing is a lot of work, so I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't come about.) -- Gary Wolfe, SYSOP of the Temporal Vortex BBS // Amiga! ..uflorida!unf7!tlvx!sysop, unf7!tlvx!sysop@bikini.cis.ufl.edu \X/ Yeah!
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) (09/06/90)
In article <1990Aug30.125917.18354@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >OK, I'm confused. Is the $2/min the voice support or the BBS support? Neither, it has been decided NOT to go to the 900 number for tech supprt, due to customer input. The old number (708)916-1100 is still good. >>When I ordered, I asked the person on the phone (Diane Gomez) about the >>new C++. She distinctly said 2nd quarter '91. So now they're talking >>about it. It will be good. > >Well, that's not exactly great news, since equally "authoritative" reports >here earlier this month had a C++ upgrade coming out October '90. > No SAS Institute employee has ever said, on the net or elsewhere, that we were planning on shipping a C++ product in October 1990. This is patently false. We have never had an internal deadline of October 1990, much less a scheduled product announcement. We have only been working on the Amiga C++ port of our in-house C++ compiler since we took over the Amiga product in July 1990, so a ship date of October would be totally off the wall. Second quarter 1991 is much more reasonable, but keep in mind that even that date is not a product announcement, but only an internal target. ***** =*|_o_o|\\=====Doug Walker, Software Distiller====== BBS: (919)460-7430 = *|. o.| || | o |// For all you do, this bug's for you! ====== usenet: ...mcnc!rti!sas!walker plink: dwalker bix: djwalker
scott@stsci.EDU (Jim Scott) (09/27/90)
Could someone please e-mail me SAS's phone number so I can call and find out about 'Lattice' C educational discount ? Thanks, Jim
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) (09/29/90)
In article <1822@nemesis.stsci.edu> scott@stsci.EDU (Jim Scott) writes: > >Could someone please e-mail me SAS's phone number so I >can call and find out about 'Lattice' C educational >discount ? > >Thanks, >Jim Amiga C Sales SAS Institute, INC SAS Campus Drive Cary, NC 27513 (919)677-8000 ***** =*|_o_o|\\=====Doug Walker, Software Distiller====== BBS: (919)460-7430 = *|. o.| || | o |// For all you do, this bug's for you! ====== usenet: ...mcnc!rti!sas!walker plink: dwalker bix: djwalker
hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) (10/02/90)
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) writes: >In article <1822@nemesis.stsci.edu> scott@stsci.EDU (Jim Scott) writes: >> >>Could someone please e-mail me SAS's phone number so I >>can call and find out about 'Lattice' C educational >>discount ? >> >>Thanks, >>Jim >Amiga C Sales >SAS Institute, INC >SAS Campus Drive >Cary, NC 27513 >(919)677-8000 BTW. Does anybody know how (or if) they can be reached via USENET? Bye Elric for Mr. Somehow++ Strange -- #include <std_discalimer.h> Hakan 'Elric' Tandogan /// #include <clever_saying.h> /// email: hytandog@faui{09|44}.informatik.uni-erlangen.de \\\ /// What smail: Hakan Tandogan,Werderstrasse 23, D-8500 Nuernberg 20 \XXX/ Else?
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) (10/03/90)
In article <hytandog.654879355@faui09>, hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) writes: |> From: hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) |> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga |> Subject: Re: Lattice/SAS C |> |> walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) writes: ^^^^^^^ LOOK HERE |> |> >In article <1822@nemesis.stsci.edu> scott@stsci.EDU (Jim Scott) writes: |> >> |> >>Could someone please e-mail me SAS's phone number so I |> >>can call and find out about 'Lattice' C educational |> >>discount ? |> >> |> >>Thanks, |> >>Jim |> |> >Amiga C Sales |> >SAS Institute, INC |> >SAS Campus Drive |> >Cary, NC 27513 |> >(919)677-8000 |> |> BTW. Does anybody know how (or if) they can be reached |> via USENET? |> Did you happen to notice Doug's net address? -- W. John Guineau guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation Marlboro MA. 01752
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) (10/09/90)
In article <1990Oct3.083322@wjg.enet.dec.com> guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com writes: >In article <hytandog.654879355@faui09>, >hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) writes: >|> From: hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) >|> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga >|> Subject: Re: Lattice/SAS C >|> >|> walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) writes: > ^^^^^^^ > LOOK HERE > >Did you happen to notice Doug's net address? > Yes, I work for SAS Institute, Inc. in Cary, NC on the Amiga compiler (among other compiler projects). However, please don't contact me to purchase, upgrade, or support the Amiga product. For one thing, it is verboten to use the net for commercial purposes; for another, our net connection is not that reliable sometimes, and I can't guarantee that I will get your mail or that you will get my reply; and finally, it's not my job to do this, and your questions/problems/bug reports/upgrade requests may well get lost between me and the tech support or sales departments. Please contact the appropriate department at the Institute if you have questions or problems: Amiga C Sales Amiga C Technical Support SAS Institute, Inc. SAS Institute, Inc. SAS Campus Drive SAS Campus Drive Cary, NC 27513 Cary, NC 27513 USA USA Phone (919)677-8000 Fax (919)677-8123 or on BIX in the sas.c/amiga.c conference. Thanks for your cooperation. ***** NOW AT 9600 DUAL STANDARD! =*|_o_o|\\=====Doug Walker, Software Distiller====== BBS: (919)460-7430 = *|. o.| || | o |// For all you do, this bug's for you! ====== usenet: ...mcnc!rti!sas!walker plink: dwalker bix: djwalker
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) (10/09/90)
In article <1990Oct08.192028.13460@unx.sas.com>, walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) writes: |> From: walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) |> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga |> Subject: Re: Lattice/SAS C |> |> In article <1990Oct3.083322@wjg.enet.dec.com> guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com writes: |> >In article <hytandog.654879355@faui09>, |> >hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) writes: |> >|> From: hytandog@faui09.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Hakan Yildiray Tandogan) |> >|> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga |> >|> Subject: Re: Lattice/SAS C |> >|> |> >|> walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) writes: |> > ^^^^^^^ |> > LOOK HERE |> > |> >Did you happen to notice Doug's net address? |> > |> |> Yes, I work for SAS Institute, Inc. in Cary, NC on the Amiga compiler |> (among other compiler projects). However, please don't contact me to |> purchase, upgrade, or support the Amiga product. For one thing, it is |> verboten to use the net for commercial purposes; for another, our net |> connection is not that reliable sometimes, and I can't guarantee that I |> will get your mail or that you will get my reply; and finally, it's not |> my job to do this, and your questions/problems/bug reports/upgrade requests |> may well get lost between me and the tech support or sales departments. |> Yes, sorry about that, Doug. I wasn't intending to direct this traffic to you, but was just being a bit obnoxoius. The person I had followed up to asked how to contact someone at SAS over the net, and his posting included your mail address (at SAS)! I was just pointing it out... sorry, it won't happen again :-) |> |> ***** NOW AT 9600 DUAL STANDARD! |> =*|_o_o|\\=====Doug Walker, Software Distiller====== BBS: (919)460-7430 = |> *|. o.| || |> | o |// For all you do, this bug's for you! |> ====== |> usenet: ...mcnc!rti!sas!walker plink: dwalker bix: djwalker |> -- W. John Guineau guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation Marlboro MA. 01752