hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) (08/23/90)
I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4 upgrade. Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all. Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original itself. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Dwayne (Tony) Hutson +++ Phoenix Commodore Computer Group + + Vice President of PCCG +++ Indianapolis, IN + + +++ + + +++ hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu + ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
elessar@pawl.rpi.edu (Kenneth E. Lareau) (08/23/90)
hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes: >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the >customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. >What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they >were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4 >upgrade. Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all. >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't >support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original >itself. Well, considering that Lattice no longer is putting out the product, but that SAS is, it would seem that SAS doesn't need to stick to the word that Lattice gave. I could be wrong on this, as I have no idea how Lattice and SAS worked things out, but I don't think Lattice has a say over it anymore. Then again, there may be another reason behind it. If it was stated that such a minor upgrade would be free, I would like to know why this isn't being followed through, as I'm considering the upgrade to 5.10 from 5.05 myself...anyone out there have an answer? Ken Lareau elessar@pawl.rpi.edu
paleo@uncecs.edu (Constantine A. LaPasha) (08/23/90)
Well, I tend to dissagree - The 5.10 version is a fairly substantial improvement over 5.05a IMHO, and well worth the $40 to upgrade. With the swap of the marketing of the Amiga C compiler to SAS, I'm not sure what can be said of Lattice marketing types and their "promises". SAS has hired additional tech support staff for the Amiga C product, as well as more development staff(I think) to compliment their already intensive development program. If providing newer (improved) versions of a product and additional tech support staff qualifies for "no support" then I guess they qualify. Sorry to sound grumpy, but !coffee + am ... -- =============================================== Kostya LaPasha paleo@ecsvax.uncecs.edu ==== ... virtually, we can do anything ... ====
carpent@SRC.Honeywell.COM (Todd Carpenter) (08/23/90)
hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes: >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, > {stuff} >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. Oh, kwit-cher-y-nin! Sheesh! How many bloody products out there will send you regular updates without charging you at least media and shipping costs? Since I purchased 5.0, I have dreceive 5.02, 5.04 (a and b, I think), and 5.05. That is a *lot* of disks. I actually sent in some money to them for the 5.05 upgrade, which they returned with the upgrade, along with a polite letter saying it wasn't necessary. Obviously in the mean time their costs have grown. Or perhaps we are getting something aside from bug fixes, such as BETTER PERFORMANCE, which they have no legal/moral obligation to provide free of charge. >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't >support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original Bullchips. Welcome to the real grown up world where people pay money for software maintenance. Who do you think pays for their people to perform software upgrades. Hmmm? New sales cannot always be expected to provide the money to keep the rest of the folks happy. Especially with compilers and software. They are a once-only purchase for most people. It's a good product. If you don't want to pay, don't upgrade. Simple as that. (Yes, I know. It is early in the morning and I shouldn't be heating up this soon. But folks, get real, and try to remember what you learned in your economics classes.) Todd P. Carpenter Honeywell Systems and Research Center voice: (612)782-7229 3660 Technology Drive, Minneapolis, MN 55418-1006 domain: carpent@src.honeywell.com or Arkon%kryl@src.honeywell.com bang-style: <any-smart-host>!srcsip!carpent Citadel: US 612 699 3106 (Kryl) User Manual, p34, line 5: I am not authorized to have any opinions.
mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) (08/24/90)
In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes:
I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice
product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler,
but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in
August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only
major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the
customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec.
What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they
were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4
upgrade. Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all.
Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't
support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original
itself.
The story as I heard it from Lattice is that "major upgrades" - from
4.x to 5.x, and so on - would cost money, but that minor upgrades &
bug fixes - from 5.02 to 5.04 - would be free. From what I've heard,
5.1 is qualifies as a "major upgrade", as it includes many
enhancements and support for 2.0. SAS is saying that the minor
upgrades & bug fixes will continue to be free. Seems like they've
changed the name, but not the policy. Doesn't seem like anything to
get upset about to me. Nor does $40 seem like a "good percentage of
the cost of the original", being less than 20% of the current street
price.
On the other hand, things are changing. Wait to see how the bug fixes
for 5.1 are handled before getting upset.
<mike
--
All around my hat, I will wear the green willow. Mike Meyer
And all around my hat, for a twelve-month and a day. mwm@relay.pa.dec.com
And if anyone should ask me, the reason why I'm wearing it, decwrl!mwm
It's all for my true love, who's far far away.jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org ( Staff OACIS) (08/24/90)
In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes: >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the >customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. Well, I know there have been numerous responses to this already, but being in the middle of this (as well as the front and back) for so long I have to add my $.02. The basic policy (which my no longer apply) could be thought of in terms of version digit change. Changes which involved the 2nd digit to the right of the decimal (e.g., 5.02 -> 5.04) were considered minor upgrades, usually involved mostly patches, and were distributed free. Changes involving the 1st digit over (5.0x -> 5.1x) were relatively major, usually involved major rewrites of a good portion of the product, and were distributed in "new product" form (generally without a manual) upon request for a small fee (mostly to recover production, shipping, and handling costs, but with a little capitalist padding :-) We struggled hard to keep the cost low, though). Changes involving digits to the left of the decimal were considered quite major, involving extensive changes across the board, including documentation, and upgrades were priced accordingly (although never more than $75, if memory serves me). >What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they >were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4 >upgrade. Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all. >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't >support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original >itself. > There has never been a 5.4 upgrade. It was 5.02 -> 5.04. SAS customer support is there, and is good. I don't necessarily agree with the 1-900 bit, but they certainly aren't setting any precedent (Microsoft has done it this way for a while now), and at least they answer the phone, unlike some other Amiga C compiler manufacturer I heard of on the net recently :-). Given the price of dics, you could sell the 6 you get with this upgrade and offset the cost somewhat if you think it's too steep :-). -- John Meissen .............................. Oregon Advanced Computing Institute jmeissen@oacis.org (Internet) | "That's the remarkable thing about life; ..!sequent!oacis!jmeissen (UUCP) | things are never so bad that they can't jmeissen (BIX) | get worse." - Calvin & Hobbes
jhc00614@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (08/24/90)
Caveat emptor. If you don't have it in writing, it ain't worth diddley,
so says Bo.
Jasonnfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) (08/24/90)
In article <590@oregon.oacis.org>, jmeissen@oregon.oacis.org ( Staff OACIS) writes: > In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes: > >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice > >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, > >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in > >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only > >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the > >customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. > > The basic policy (which my no longer apply) could be thought of in terms > of version digit change. Changes which involved the 2nd digit to the right > of the decimal (e.g., 5.02 -> 5.04) were considered minor upgrades, usually > involved mostly patches, and were distributed free. Changes involving the 1st > digit over (5.0x -> 5.1x) were relatively major, usually involved major > rewrites of a good portion of the product, and were distributed in "new product" > form I hadn't thought of it in these terms, but it sounds like SAS is being consistent with Lattice's numbering for revisions and updates. This release sounds similar to the change from v3.03 to v3.10, and the numbering supports it. Of course, I went from v3.03 to v4.0 anyway, but v3.10 sounded like a major release. I'm still not happy with having to either join BIX or pay $2.00 per minute for technical support. It seems like it was implied in the past that the higher cost of utilities such as compilers, was to cover the cost of technical support. I still can't complain about the cost though, as long as there are friendly helpful people here, and on CIS, so the technical support isn't really needed. And maybe they will re-implement the BBS that Lattice had, as they say they are considering. ---Mike, -- A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg DSAC-FSD "However," replied the Universe, | DLA Systems Automation Center "The fact has not created in me a | Columbus, Ohio sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil CIS: 73777,360
tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) (08/25/90)
>Item:10432 About: Lattice Upgrade >Author: [Dwayne Hutson] (*Masked*@mentor.cc.purdue.edu) >Date: Thu Aug 23 16:42:20 1990 >Lines: 19 Keyw: Question about Lattice Support... > >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in Give me a break. I have received more than >12< free disks from Lattice, including a new set of 5.04 release disk because the patch was a bit munged. I don't think that 40$ for upgrades that include support for what is in effect a NEW OPERATING SYSTEM (2.0) is at all steep. ========[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Amiga & Unix Software Development]======== = "And in the darkened offices, the terminals shine like stars." = ============= Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1 ================== = NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by either = = Xanadu Enterpises or its clients, AT&T Bell Labs or others. = ==== The Romantic Encounters BBS 201-759-8450(PEP) / 201-759-8568(2400) ====
sjorr@cbmtor.UUCP (Stephen Orr) (08/25/90)
In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> you write: >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the >customer money. This is a major release (I talked directly to SAS), not only have they made many changes to the compiler/utilities, but they have also changed companies, will be sending you 6 disks (NOT PATCHES), and new pages for your manual. If you want you can argue that SAS should have called this 6.0, but the number is just a technicallity. >This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. >What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they >were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4 >upgrade. The last version of Lattice was 5.04, not 5.4, the new version is 5.1 >Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all. >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't >support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original >itself. My father, a graphic designer who uses Mac products, was just asked to pay over $300 for an upgrade to QuarkXPress (a DTP package), and there new code PREVENTS more than one version of the code running on an AppleTalk network. They now FORCE you to buy several copies if you have several machines. No site licensing even. Stop complaining Lattice...now SAS has done a good job for the Ami. > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >+ Dwayne (Tony) Hutson +++ Phoenix Commodore Computer Group + >+ Vice President of PCCG +++ Indianapolis, IN + >+ +++ + >+ +++ hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu + >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Stephen Orr SandIsoft ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have nothing to do with Commodore Canada my opinions are those of my employer...ie: I'm self employed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Member of the ADF (Amiga Developers Forum) - making the Amiga a Better Place ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) (08/28/90)
In article <13240@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hutsonda@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Dwayne Hutson) writes: >I have to wonder where my money went to when I purchased the Lattice >product. I have enjoyed the use I have gotten from the Lattice compiler, >but I distinctly remember a Lattice salesman tell me at the AmiExpo in >August of '89 that any upgrade that was 5.x would be free. He said only >major releases which would have a new number such as 6.x would cost the >customer money. This is one reason I chose Lattice over Aztec. >What has happened? I supported and wrote in Lattice's defense when they >were recieving negative comments last update, over the mixup of the 5.4 >upgrade. Now I am wondering if I should have said anything at all. >Is there no longer real customer support anymore. I mean it really isn't >support if you have to pay a good percentage of the cost of the original >itself. > I seriously doubt any Lattice salesperson told you that no charge would be made for any 5.x upgrade. There was not a charge for any 5.x upgrade in existence at that time, and there were not plans to charge for the 5.04 upgrade which was in beta at that time. If someone told you that there would never be a charge for any upgrade starting with '5', they were out of line. It has been over two years since Lattice/SAS has come out with an upgrade that cost money. SAS Institute could have easily decided to call this release 6.0 - what's in a name, after all? - if they chose to do so. Your 5.04 or 5.05 compiler has not LOST any features or functionality, so if you don't want to take advantage of the new stuff, you can keep on using the compiler that you have apparently been satisfied with so far. I really don't think it is unreasonable to charge for this upgrade when you consider the amount of work that has gone into it, and the number of free upgrades you have already received. Any arguments based on the (totally arbitrary) release number are irrelevant; I think you have to look at the value you are getting. ***** =*|_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
drtiller@uokmax.uucp (Donald Richard Tillery Jr) (08/28/90)
What IS ridiculous is a 900 number at $2 per minute for technical support. I'd rather call long distance. I heard Lattice C wasn't making much money, maybe they figure the 900 number will get the profits up. I can see it now: I have umpty problem..."hold on I'll look it up"...15 minutes and $30 later..."I'll have to put you on hold again and ask our resident expert"....20 minutes later and ANOTHER $40 later..."I'm sorry, he's at lunch, can you call back later?" What a CROCK...you could spend hundreds and get NO answer to your problem. THIS IS NOT CUSTOMER SUPPORT, because no customer in his right mind (and I make the assumption that anyone with an Amiga and programmin in C has a right mind) is going to use this ignorant setup. What's SAS stand for anyway, Screw Amiga Suckers? I for one have pen in hand to register my distaste for such treatment! _______ __________ _/____) ' __ /_/ / ' / / __ _ "N.I.N.J.A.J.I.S."-Me / \___/__/___/ |_ /__/__/__/_/_-_/__/_/ The Displaced Razorback. ___________________________________________/ Founder: IDGAFF Ltd. The Amiga Computer - "...a more fiendish disputant than the Great Hyperbolic Omni-Cognate Neutron Wrangler of Ciceronicus Twelve..." -D.Adams; Well, almost.
jmeissen@ogicse.ogi.edu (John Meissen) (08/28/90)
In article <1990Aug27.223648.27391@uokmax.uucp> drtiller@uokmax.uucp (Donald Richard Tillery Jr) writes: >What IS ridiculous is a 900 number at $2 per minute for technical support. I'd >rather call long distance. : [imaginary scenario deleted] : >I for one have pen in hand to register my distaste for such treatment! For the greatest effect, direct your displeasure to: Ingrid Ammondson SAS Institute SAS Campus Drive Cary, NC 27513 SAS is well known for being responsive to its users. Perhaps if enough Amiga C users were to politely express their disappointment with the 1-900 policy SAS might be persuaded to change it. John Meissen .............................. Oregon Advanced Computing Institute jmeissen@oacis.org (Internet) | "That's the remarkable thing about life; ..!sequent!oacis!jmeissen (UUCP) | things are never so bad that they can't jmeissen (BIX) | get worse." - Calvin & Hobbes -- John Meissen .............................. Oregon Advanced Computing Institute jmeissen@oacis.org (Internet) | "That's the remarkable thing about life; ..!sequent!oacis!jmeissen (UUCP) | things are never so bad that they can't jmeissen (BIX) | get worse." - Calvin & Hobbes
jbickers@templar.actrix.co.nz (John Bickers) (08/29/90)
Quoted from - drtiller@uokmax.uucp (Donald Richard Tillery Jr): > What a CROCK...you could spend hundreds and get NO answer to your problem. > THIS IS NOT CUSTOMER SUPPORT, because no customer in his right mind (and I make You'd be better off going to the public in any case. I could sympathise with SAS wanting to discourage nuisance calls, though it may have an impact on long-distance serious callers. > _______ __________ If you've got problems with the compiler, a lot of us (I'm sure :) would like to hear what they are, in order to be prepared for when we confront those same problems too. If we can use Usenet for complaining, we can also use it for sharing useful information. -- *** John Bickers, TAP, NZAmigaUG. jbickers@templar.actrix.co.nz *** *** "Man, Machine -> Super Human Being" - Kraftwerk. ***
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (08/29/90)
In article <8&+%4H%@rpi.edu>, elessar@pawl.rpi.edu (Kenneth E. Lareau) writes: > > Well, considering that Lattice no longer is putting out the product, but > that SAS is, it would seem that SAS doesn't need to stick to the word that > Lattice gave. I could be wrong on this, as I have no idea how Lattice and > SAS worked things out, but I don't think Lattice has a say over it anymore. > Then again, there may be another reason behind it. If it was stated that > such a minor upgrade would be free, I would like to know why this isn't > being followed through, as I'm considering the upgrade to 5.10 from 5.05 > myself...anyone out there have an answer? > > Ken Lareau > elessar@pawl.rpi.edu Great!! My subsidury Alan-the-mate will do a deal with you to buy your Amiga for $80,000 if you ship the Amiga to him first. You agree, and Amiga arrives. Alan-the-mate writes the check and duely starts walking to the post office with it. Unfortunately, on the way, the subsidury is subsumed by a corporate restructuring and Baxter-the-out-and-out-Bastard gains control of the fiscal management of AB-Consolidated-Actions and immediately suspends all activities of Alan-the-mate. In the administrative reappraisal of the fiscal management vis-a-vi and with regards to funds out going, it is decided that a retainment of all funds which may or may not have originated in exchange for goods or services which may or may not have been provided is in order... Regards Alan (I think you'll find if you ask them nicely, they will honour any outstanding agreements)
jrichard@hawk.ulowell.edu (John Richardson) (08/30/90)
What is happening with Lattice C++? I was consitering buying
this program as I am a big fan of OOP. Now I'm going to wait until
I can get some more info.
S.A.S. :
Have you taken over Lattice's C++?
if so :
Will you release a AT+T 2.0 version and will you
support AmigaDOS 2.0 for C++???
I already sent in my new registration and $40 for the C update, so you
see, I am a good customer:)
<~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
>John Richardson |"sundogs fire on the horizon <
<UseNet:jrichard@hawk.ulowell.edu| meteor viens stream across the night>
>Plan: | ...the spark still flies <
<MacGyver-ize programs 'till they| reflected in another pair of eyes." >
>work (pass the duct tape please)| <
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
>John Richardson |"sundogs fire on the horizon <
<UseNet:jrichard@hawk.ulowell.edu| meteor viens stream across the night>
>Plan: | ...the spark still flies <stewartw@cognos.UUCP (Stewart Winter) (08/31/90)
In article <26d5d0d4-28c0.5comp.sys.amiga-1@tronsbox.xei.com> tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) writes: > I don't think that 40$ for upgrades that include support for what is in >effect a NEW OPERATING SYSTEM (2.0) is at all steep. Unless when you bought the compiler, you were told by the manufacturer that your first upgrade was going to be free ... -- Stewart Winter Cognos Incorporated S-mail: P.O. Box 9707 VOICE: (613) 738-1338 x3830 FAX: (613) 738-0002 3755 Riverside Drive UUCP: uunet!cognos!stewartw Ottawa, Ontario The bird for the day is .... African Grey CANADA K1G 3Z4
tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) (09/05/90)
>Resp: 18 of 18 About: Re: Lattice Upgrade ><> [Stewart Winter] (*Masked*@cognos.UUCP) > >In article <26d5d0d4-28c0.5comp.sys.amiga-1@tronsbox.xei.com> >tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (HIM) writes: > >> I don't think that 40$ for upgrades that include support for what is in >>effect a NEW OPERATING SYSTEM (2.0) is at all steep. > > Unless when you bought the compiler, you were told by the manufacturer >that your first upgrade was going to be free ... > > It was my impression that he was told that by the DEALER. Many dealers will do AMAZING things to make a sale and it is NOT the manufacturer's fault. ========[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Amiga & Unix Software Development]======== = "And in the darkened offices, the terminals shine like stars." = ============= Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1 ================== = NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by either = = Xanadu Enterpises or its clients, AT&T Bell Labs or others. = ==== The Romantic Encounters BBS 201-759-8450(PEP) / 201-759-8568(2400) ====
walker@unx.sas.com (Doug Walker) (09/06/90)
In article <1254@swan.ulowell.edu> jrichard@hawk.ulowell.edu (John Richardson) writes: > > What is happening with Lattice C++? I was consitering buying >this program as I am a big fan of OOP. Now I'm going to wait until >I can get some more info. > > S.A.S. : > Have you taken over Lattice's C++? > if so : > Will you release a AT+T 2.0 version and will you > support AmigaDOS 2.0 for C++??? > >I already sent in my new registration and $40 for the C update, so you >see, I am a good customer:) SAS Institute, Inc. is planning on a AT&T 2.1-compatible release of C++. No ship date has been announced, but we are targeting second quarter 1991 as an internal deadline. ***** =*|_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