evtracy@sdrc.UUCP (Tracy Schuhwerk) (06/27/90)
From article <12961@cbmvax.commodore.com>, by daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie): > [ Information on possable compatability problems etc. removed... Thanks Dave! ] > As for software compatibility issues, there's 2.0 vs. 1.3. I've found 2.0 > pretty solid lately, bus as mentioned in these parts before, the version > shipping with the 3000 is a solid but not necessarily final release. Problems > under 2.0 that go away when you boot the machine under 1.3 are what you call > software compatibility problems. Without knowledge of what's going on inside, > it's impossible to say whether it's a bug in the application or in 2.0. If > it is a 2.0 bug, you'll find the justification for the first 3000s being > upgradable via floppy. If an application bug, you should hear from the > vendor; you all sent in those registration cards, right? I agree with Dave that 2.0 seems very solid! I've been running a lot of OLD software through the paces (stuff that I would expect to conform to the rules the least) and have only crashed 2.0 maybe 3 times. I don't think I've used 1.3 more than a couple of times (SID and 2.0 don't get along, and I needed to have an easy quick way to copy loads of stuff to the hard drive... selectively). I am not very concerned with games not running on that machine (older ones that is... I kept my A1000 for that purpose). I would like to say that Sculpt-Animate 4D SCREAMS on the A3000! We ran SA4D on a 3 Meg 2000 and now on the 3000... The render times are much faster!!! PageStream also runs like a champ! I have installed my Lattice C 5.0 on it and compiles some small programs and it too is blindingly fast! Kudos to the crew at Commodore! I think the 3000 is going to go a long way toward making the Amiga a more powerful force in the PC market! Again, Thanks Dave! P.S.: The day after I left the message about getting the defective 3000, Rick Sterling from Commodore called me at work to get some information on the defective unit! Talk about Customer Service! That makes a guy feel really good about the purchase he just made!!! Thanks Rick! -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= _______________ / / / | uunet!sdrc!evtracy / (___ _ /_ /_ _ __ /_/ | evtracy@SDRC.UU.NET / . _____)__(__/ /__/_/_/ /__/_/_/__(/__/ (__/ \ +--------------------- Structural Dynamics Research Corporation (SDRC) - Milford, Ohio =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (06/28/90)
In-Reply-To: message from evtracy@sdrc.UUCP Did you also notice that the sleepy mouse has been changed? No more cloud and "Z's"...you get a stopwatch. I'm still waiting for the price on my system, but I can't wait! Sean //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " Fanatics have their INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | dreams, wherewith they | weave a paradise for RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | a sect. " Voice: (512) 994-1602 PLINK: ce3k* | -Keats | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
evtracy@sdrc.UUCP (Tracy Schuhwerk) (06/28/90)
From article <3320@crash.cts.com>, by seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham): > In-Reply-To: message from evtracy@sdrc.UUCP > > Did you also notice that the sleepy mouse has been changed? > > No more cloud and "Z's"...you get a stopwatch. I'm still waiting for the > price on my system, but I can't wait! There have been so many changes to the Workbench that I am still finding new things (and I've been pounding on the 3000 a lot the past few days!)! I really like the new preferences! Workbench 2.0 gives you MUCH more control over your environment and makes it easier to deal with changing small aspects of the environment. I do like the clock instead of the "ZZZ" pointer (although it is a bit on the HUGE side... not a subtle little pointer for sure!). I have been trying software out like mad and have had very little (of any importance to me at least) blow up on me (mostly games). My girlfriend has a 2000 with 3 meg, a GVP 40Q hardcard, and a SyQuest so we have been checking all the stuff she has out too! The 3000 is well worth the wait (I had a deposit down on mine for almost 3 months!)! I can't believe how slow my girlfriends 2000 is :-) now (she's starting to get the A3000 itch too!)! -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= _______________ / / / | uunet!sdrc!evtracy / (___ _ /_ /_ _ __ /_/ | evtracy@SDRC.UU.NET / . _____)__(__/ /__/_/_/ /__/_/_/__(/__/ (__/ \ +--------------------- Structural Dynamics Research Corporation (SDRC) - Milford, Ohio =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
aliu@aludra.usc.edu (Alex Liu) (06/29/90)
In article <3320@crash.cts.com> seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) writes: >In-Reply-To: message from evtracy@sdrc.UUCP > >Did you also notice that the sleepy mouse has been changed? > >No more cloud and "Z's"...you get a stopwatch. I'm still waiting for the What? I love that ZZ cloud! -Viet
sjcst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Scott J. Corley) (06/29/90)
I just read a post in comp.sys.amiga.hardware that AmigaVision is shipping.
Can anyone confirm this? The A3000 I ordered arrived at my dealer and I just
picked it up yesterday , but I didnt get a copy of AmigaVision which I
thought was to be shipped for free with all 2000/3000 systems. Is this info
correct or was the statement that AmigaVision would be free just a rumor
started by the Amiga magazines?
Thanks
scott corleyRandy.Coghill@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Randy Coghill) (07/02/90)
Dave, do you know if there is any chance of Commodore leaving 1.3 backwards compatibility in the 3000? This feature is an excellent one, especially considering the fact that it is going to take a while for some software to become 2.0/68030 compatible if they will be at all! While I agree that manufactuers have had ample opportunity to upgrade their software there are many that won't. Randy -- Randy Coghill - via FidoNet node 1:140/22 UUCP: alberta!dvinci!weyr!70!Randy.Coghill Internet: Randy.Coghill@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG Standard Disclaimers Apply...
evtracy@sdrc.UUCP (Tracy Schuhwerk) (07/02/90)
From article <25494@unix.cis.pitt.edu>, by sjcst2@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Scott J. Corley): > I just read a post in comp.sys.amiga.hardware that AmigaVision is shipping. > Can anyone confirm this? The A3000 I ordered arrived at my dealer and I just > picked it up yesterday , but I didnt get a copy of AmigaVision which I > thought was to be shipped for free with all 2000/3000 systems. Is this info > correct or was the statement that AmigaVision would be free just a rumor > started by the Amiga magazines? I didn't get a copy of AmigaVision with my A3000, but I did get a certificat that I sent in to Commodore for my copy of AmigaVision. I would check with your dealer and see if he has the certificate, if not, call Commodore customer support, someone I talked to said they did that and their copy of AV was shipped pronto! -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= _______________ / / / | uunet!sdrc!evtracy / (___ _ /_ /_ _ __ /_/ | evtracy@SDRC.UU.NET / . _____)__(__/ /__/_/_/ /__/_/_/__(/__/ (__/ \ +--------------------- Structural Dynamics Research Corporation (SDRC) - Milford, Ohio =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
peter@cbmvax.commodore.com (Peter Cherna) (07/03/90)
In article <1990Jun26.224211.16335@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > > To any Commodorians, in particular Guru Haynie: > > Although Compugraphic has admitted to licensing >Intellifont technology to Commodore, I realize that it is >unreleased and thus you can't say anything about it (lest you >have your #$%*$%& chopped off 8) > However, can you say what if any changes to fonts have >been made to the current A3000 version of 2.0, and if any other >changes will be made for the final 2.0 to be seen this Fall. There have been some changes to fonts under 2.0. To start, there is a brand new clean sans-serif Topaz font. More importantly, 2.0 has bitmap scaling fonts. Not to be confused with outline fonts. If you explicitly ask for Topaz 22, for example, you will get a scaled copy of Topaz 11. The various AvailFonts() calls will give you only the designed sizes that exist, as before. Of course, the scaling is done with bitmap scaling calls (which are now available to any application), so the results will depend on several factors, including the size of the font compared to the size of the result (even multiples look best, smaller multiples often look better than larger ones), and the font itself. For whatever reason, for example, Courier scales better than Times. >Thanks, > -- Ethan > >Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu > >"If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" > -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else Peter -- Peter Cherna, Software Engineer, Commodore-Amiga, Inc. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!peter peter@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com My opinions do not necessarily represent the opinions of my employer. "If you insist on spending $10000 on a 68030 technology, may we humbly suggest you buy three Amiga 3000's."
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (07/05/90)
> > More importantly, 2.0 has bitmap scaling fonts. Not to be confused with > outline fonts. If you explicitly ask for Topaz 22, for example, you > will get a scaled copy of Topaz 11. The various AvailFonts() calls > will give you only the designed sizes that exist, as before. Of course, > the scaling is done with bitmap scaling calls (which are now available > to any application), so the results will depend on several factors, > including the size of the font compared to the size of the result > (even multiples look best, smaller multiples often look better than > larger ones), and the font itself. For whatever reason, for example, > Courier scales better than Times. Okay. We are getting there. Now... (my favorite question) can you rotate the bitmapped fonts (like 90 deg)? Yes... (everyone groans)... Does anyone have a nice way to write Amiga bit mapped fonts to the screen sideways? Regards Alan
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (07/06/90)
In article <719.2691DC21@weyr.FIDONET.ORG> Randy.Coghill@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Randy Coghill) writes: >Dave, do you know if there is any chance of Commodore leaving 1.3 >backwards compatibility in the 3000? Other than via an MMU toy like SetCPU, you won't always be able to run 1.3 on the 3000 as you can now. >This feature is an excellent one, especially considering the fact that >it is going to take a while for some software to become 2.0/68030 >compatible if they will be at all! The "while" for software to become 68020/30 compatible has passed. We shipped 68020 systems almost two years ago. Most of the guidelines for 680x0 compatibility have been in place since the beginning of Amiga-time, and I did a complete analysis of this at the Washington DC DevCon in the spring of '88. As for 2.0 compatibility, the reason to keep 1.3 around is to give everyone a chance to fix their bugs. Both Amiga programmers, who'll fix any 2.0 bugs they find, and applications programmers, who should fix their 1.3 bugs that break under 2.0. Once 2.0 is ROMed, there will be no need to support 1.3 anymore. Good companies will have released bug fixes to their software where necessary, and not-so-good companies will be telling you the kind of support you'll get from them in the future. >While I agree that manufactuers have had ample opportunity to upgrade >their software there are many that won't. > >Randy > > >-- >Randy Coghill - via FidoNet node 1:140/22 >UUCP: alberta!dvinci!weyr!70!Randy.Coghill >Internet: Randy.Coghill@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG >Standard Disclaimers Apply... -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "I have been given the freedom to do as I see fit" -REM
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (07/06/90)
In article <13058@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes: >As for 2.0 compatibility, the reason to keep 1.3 around is to give everyone >a chance to fix their bugs. Both Amiga programmers, who'll fix any 2.0 bugs >they find, and applications programmers, who should fix their 1.3 bugs that >break under 2.0. Once 2.0 is ROMed, there will be no need to support 1.3 >anymore. Good companies will have released bug fixes to their software where >necessary, and not-so-good companies will be telling you the kind of support >you'll get from them in the future. Most of the companies I've spoken to (including NewTek and Gold Disk) have stated that it is their policy to wait for 2.0 to be finished before working on bug fixes because they say they don't know if the bug is their fault or Workbench's fault. Gold Disk said that all the problems with gadgets were problems with Intuition and that it had nothing to do with them. If this attitude is prevalent we may have to wait until after September before we get knew versions. >-- >Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" > {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy > "I have been given the freedom to do as I see fit" -REM -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu "If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (07/06/90)
In article <1990Jul5.193053.30153@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <13058@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes: >>As for 2.0 compatibility, the reason to keep 1.3 around is to give everyone >>a chance to fix their bugs. Both Amiga programmers, who'll fix any 2.0 bugs >>they find, and applications programmers, who should fix their 1.3 bugs that >>break under 2.0. Once 2.0 is ROMed, there will be no need to support 1.3 >>anymore. Good companies will have released bug fixes to their software where >>necessary, and not-so-good companies will be telling you the kind of support >>you'll get from them in the future. > > Most of the companies I've spoken to (including NewTek and >Gold Disk) have stated that it is their policy to wait for 2.0 to be >finished before working on bug fixes because they say they don't know >if the bug is their fault or Workbench's fault. Gold Disk said that >all the problems with gadgets were problems with Intuition and that it >had nothing to do with them. If this attitude is prevalent we may have >to wait until after September before we get knew versions. IMHO, that's VERY dumb on the part of those companies. Interestingly I didn't meet any represenatative of such companies at DevCon. Also, I can attest to the fact that participating in the beta process is a two-way street: you get to check what Commodore is working on and a chance to help fix bugs, AND you also make sure that your software doesn't do anything "not-by-the-books", which can show up in a new release like 2.0. Commodore took out at some point some "compatibility fixes", which showed up problems in a number of products (including mine :-) Some of these fixes are back in temporarily, but will be gone at a later release. Not participating in the beta process, gives you NO leverage in situations like that. Let me also say that Commodore's 2.0 beta process was just the best I've participated to: bug reports were obtained from all possible sources (BIX, US Mail, usenet); new betas were always fairly easy to install and they included quite some "magic" to get them to be tested on non-A3000 machines. Andy and Carolyn quite often responded directly to bug reports and were always very responsive to pleas for compatibility and Carolyn was instrumental in getting the RJ file requester fixed, which certainly made my week when it happened. The same I can say of Bob 'Kodiak' Burns that listened to my bug reports on 'we know what' with almost immediate e-mail fixes. One of the reasons 2.0 seems to be so solid is, IMHO, the fact that there were *some* developers that did NOT take the attitute you are mentioning above. -- Marco -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) (07/08/90)
In article <1990Jul5.193053.30153@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <13058@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes: >>As for 2.0 compatibility, the reason to keep 1.3 around is to give everyone >>a chance to fix their bugs. >>... Good companies will have released bug fixes to their software where >>necessary, and not-so-good companies will be telling you the kind of support >>you'll get from them in the future. > > Most of the companies I've spoken to (including NewTek and >Gold Disk) have stated that it is their policy to wait for 2.0 to be >finished before working on bug fixes because they say they don't know >if the bug is their fault or Workbench's fault. WordPerfect has said that they're waiting for a release version of 2.0 to start fixing the fact that it can't even be run without crashing. Since they said this in a letter dated a couple of weeks after I received the 2.0 release and since it took them 9 months to fix the bugs it had running under 1.3 ffs, I'd say my office (which depends on WP but also has projects requireing 2.0) is screwed! -- There are two ways to improve on human factors in computing: to make the programmers less stupid and/or to make the users less stupid. Both are necessary, but neither is likely. -Dale Larson, Digital Teddy Bear (dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu)
brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) (07/08/90)
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes:
-As for 2.0 compatibility, the reason to keep 1.3 around is to give everyone
-a chance to fix their bugs. Both Amiga programmers, who'll fix any 2.0 bugs
-they find, and applications programmers, who should fix their 1.3 bugs that
-break under 2.0. Once 2.0 is ROMed, there will be no need to support 1.3
-anymore. Good companies will have released bug fixes to their software where
-necessary, and not-so-good companies will be telling you the kind of support
-you'll get from them in the future.
If no-one is supporting 1.3, and the 1000 can't run 2.0, it sounds as if
you are trying to completely force my machine out of the market.
Or, I guess it all depends on the software manufacturer to try to come up
with products that will work on both the 1.3 OS (for those of us who
can't change) and 2.0 OS for those who must change.
Feel free to mail me telling me that I am not seeing straight, the amiga
1000 will be able to run 2.0, and I have nothing to worry about with my
configuration. :-)
brian moffet
uunet!sco!brianmes1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (07/09/90)
In article <4841@milton.u.washington.edu> dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) writes: > >WordPerfect has said that they're waiting for a release version of 2.0 >to start fixing the fact that it can't even be run without crashing. >Since they said this in a letter dated a couple of weeks after I >received the 2.0 release and since it took them 9 months to fix the >bugs it had running under 1.3 ffs, I'd say my office (which depends >on WP but also has projects requireing 2.0) is screwed! I'd suggest you try running WordPerfect cause it is working PERFECTLY for me. If you make your fonts 8 point non-proportional there are no problem. If you make the menus font something else (but leave the default screen font the same) the menus come up just fine but they look a little off. The only way you can cause it not to work is by making the default screen font something other than the normal font, and then it doesn't crash its just that the display is all garbled. >-- > There are two ways to improve on human factors in computing: > to make the programmers less stupid and/or to make the users less stupid. > Both are necessary, but neither is likely. > -Dale Larson, Digital Teddy Bear (dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu) -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu "If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else
SRWMCLN@windy.dsir.govt.nz (Clive Nicolson) (07/09/90)
In article <U=A.647455428@sco>, brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) writes: > If no-one is supporting 1.3, and the 1000 can't run 2.0, it sounds as if > you are trying to completely force my machine out of the market. I see no reason why 2.0 should not run on a A1000. As long as the run time memory requirements are not excessive, then all that is needed is 2.0 KICKSTART disks and 2.0 Workbench. As far as I can tell C-A had Beta versions of 2.0 that were being used on A1000's in the field. If C-A dont want to sell these upgrades for the A1000, then I'm sure some one will. Someone from C-A should make a statement that 2.0 will never be able to run on a A1000 (if that is the case), so that every A1000 owner can get some sleep.
seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (07/10/90)
In-Reply-To: message from SRWMCLN@windy.dsir.govt.nz KS2.0 can't work with the A1000 because it's only got 256K of writable control store...KS2.0 takes up 512K, and requires TWO eproms in the A3000. KS2.0 will be a DUAL ROM set (it'll be interesting to see how they make it work with A2000s). Sean //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " Fanatics have their INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | dreams, wherewith they | weave a paradise for RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | a sect. " Voice: (512) 994-1602 PLINK: ce3k* | -Keats | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
gerber@buzzer.enet.dec.com (Robert M. Gerber) (07/10/90)
> KS2.0 can't work with the A1000 because it's only got 256K of writable control > store...KS2.0 takes up 512K, and requires TWO eproms in the A3000. KS2.0 will > be a DUAL ROM set (it'll be interesting to see how they make it work with > A2000s). > > Sean > The ROM's in the A3000 are 256K by 16 bits to give a full 32 bit buss to the ROM's. The socket in the A500/A2000 can handle either a 256K by 16 bit (KS 1.2/1.3) or 512K by 16 bit. So no problem with 2.0 in the A500/A2000 machines. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------- Robert M. Gerber UUCP: ...!decwrl!oldjon.enet!gerber INET: gerber@oldjon.enet.dec.com Any opinions represented here are definetly not those of my employer. Come to think of it, they may not be mine either!
dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) (07/12/90)
In article <1990Jul8.193603.14340@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > I'd suggest you try running WordPerfect cause it is >working PERFECTLY for me. If you make your fonts 8 point I just tried again, using the recent release of 2.0 (kickstart 33.180 and workbench 33.68) using the distribution disks to boot then using the distribution disks for the most recent WP (9/29/89) to attempt to run WP from the 2.0 workbench. It caused a software error before opening any windows to display any fonts, 8 point or not. Are you using the most recent releases? If so, please let me know what you have done to get WP to work under 2.0. -- There are two ways to improve on human factors in computing: to make the programmers less stupid and/or to make the users less stupid. Both are necessary, but neither is likely. -Dale Larson, Digital Teddy Bear (dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu)
joe@cbmvax.commodore.com (Joe O'Hara - Product Assurance) (07/12/90)
In article <4969@milton.u.washington.edu> dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) writes: >In article <1990Jul8.193603.14340@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >> I'd suggest you try running WordPerfect cause it is >>working PERFECTLY for me. If you make your fonts 8 point > > >I just tried again, using the recent release of 2.0 (kickstart 33.180 and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >workbench 33.68) using the distribution disks to boot then using the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >distribution disks for the most recent WP (9/29/89) to attempt to run >WP from the 2.0 workbench. The production release numbers are Kickstart 36.141, Workbench 36.68. Kickstart 33.180 is not even current 1.3. What machine are you running on? -- ========================================================================== Joe O'Hara || Disclaimer: I didn't say that! Commodore Electronics Ltd || Product Assurance || "I never lie when I have sand in my shoes." Systems Evaluation Group || - Geordi LeForge, Star Trek TNG ==========================================================================
jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (John Dutka) (07/12/90)
In article <4841@milton.u.washington.edu> dlarson@blake.acs.washington.edu (Dale Larson) writes: >In article <1990Jul5.193053.30153@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >>In article <13058@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes: >> Most of the companies I've spoken to (including NewTek and >>Gold Disk) have stated that it is their policy to wait for 2.0 to be >>finished before working on bug fixes because they say they don't know >>if the bug is their fault or Workbench's fault. I don't know about you, but as a registered owner of bothe DigiView 4.0 and DigiPaint 3, and the future owner of a 3000/25, I called up NewTek, and they told me that when I get the 3000, call them, and they'll work with me to get the programs up and running on the 3000/2.0 however it has to be done... -- | husc6!m2c!wpi!jdutka | "No matter how big a straw, you can't suck water up | | jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu | more than 34 feet." | | John Dutka, Jr. | -A WPI PROFESSOR WHO WISHES TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS | | jdutka%wpi.wpi.edu%mitvma.bitnet __________________________________________|