dave@well.UUCP (Dave Hughes) (02/17/89)
In the above Leo complains - justifiably it seems - that Byte should not have cancelled their APril graphics issue because 'There were to many Amiga submissions.' Well, I have a little twist on that matter - if some talented Amiga owner would just write a Naplps drawing/terminal program for the Amiga, you wouldn't need Byte! You could all share your work in full, animated and living color by telecommunicatins. And this is not a put-down of Amigans. The Amiga would make a heck of a Naplps graphics platform, both for creation and display of creative work. But, while I hear from time to time mutterings about 'I'm gonna write a Naplps program for my Amiga' its been all talk so far. But if/when one does appear, and quality graphics start moving over phone lines - with all the extreme compression the Naplps standard allows for, then Byte would really have something to write about. dave@well and dave@oldcolo
ksbooth@watcgl.waterloo.edu (Kelly Booth) (02/17/89)
In article <10747@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: > Odd -- isn't it? -- how BYTE's masthead no longer proclaims, "The >Small Systems Journal." What is your editorial slant now, gentlemen? Only the masthead of BYTE would consider this publication a journal. It is a magazine. And like most magazines, it exists only to make a profit. And, again like most magazines, that profit comes from advertising.
bammi@dsrgsun.ces.cwru.edu (Jwahar R. Bammi) (02/18/89)
In article <10747@well.UUCP>, ewhac@well (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: ... >for consideration and possible inclusion into the April issue of BYTE, in a >sort of "photo album", as it was put. > > I found out today that the photo layout for the April issue has >been cancelled. I found the reason given to be completely unbelieveable. >I think sentient readers will agree that the reason given has no real >basis. Actually i am not surprized at all. It is quite clear that the editorial staff/reviewers at BYTE wear blinders. Yes i have let my (since 1978) subscription run out. I wont even begin to talk about other magazines like Dr. Dobbs Journal (of Ibm Pc) and (Ibm Pc) Computer Languages. -- usenet: {decvax,sun}!cwjcc!dsrgsun!bammi jwahar r. bammi csnet: bammi@dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu arpa: bammi@dsrgsun.ces.CWRU.edu compuServe: 71515,155
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (02/18/89)
(Followups to rec.mag)
Of course BYTE cancelled their computer graphics photo layout because of
too many Amiga entries. BYTE is a PC magazine.
Although it is a bit like cancelling the race because too many
Porsches showed up.
--
Lotus Super Seven Series III. Too fast to race.
BYTE computer graphics photo layout cancelled. Too many Amiga entries.
richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOVewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (02/18/89)
[ Note: I have cancelled the original article. ] After posting my flame to BIX, there was a rather rapid response from Fred Langa, Editor In Chief of BYTE Magazine. It would appear that my original posting was formulated with incomplete facts. Excerpts of his postings follow: -------- [ ... ] We would have run the gallery-type piece if we had had enough available pages. I don't know who said we killed the piece *because* it was mostly Amigan, but that's wrong. I know it's wrong, because I'm the one who killed the piece. Why did I kill it? Because we had more articles than we could fit, and I chose instead to run with a meaty technical feature that compares and contrasts Amiga graphics with PS/2s and Macs. My belief is that a technical article has more lasting value than several pages of demonstration images, however good-looking. So, the technical article on Amigas is running; the gallery of pretty screens is not. We still will run one gorgeous screen on the cover of the graphics supplement. I don't know if it's Amigan or not: I didn't ask. When the Art Director and I selected the cover image, we went solely on visual appearance and didn't even consider which pc architecture produced the image. If anyone can infer an anti-amiga conspiracy in all this, my hat's off to you. Again: the LEAD ARTICLE in the whole d***** supplement focusses heavily on Amigas. If that's not enough for you, I'm very sorry. -------- [ In a later posting, Mr. Langa writes: ] [ ... ] Oh, BTW, I did go back and check; the Graphic Supplement cover *is* an Amiga-generated image. [ ... ] -------- I would emphasize that, at the time, I firmly believed that I had all the relevant facts. It appears that I was in error. Schwab
bp@pixar.uucp (Bruce Perens) (02/19/89)
This is my personal opinion, and not that of Pixar. Could it be that most computer graphics professionals are not all that interested in Byte? There is lots of good work being done with the systems sold by Byte's advertisers, but the people who are doing that work may not read Byte. The artistic non-technical people aren't interested in Byte, while the extremely technical types are not interested in many of the subjects Byte covers. Both groups have other vehicles to show their work. One would hope that the people who actually purchase the equipment Byte's advertisers sell DO read Byte. This group may have a more mundane use for their equipment (like business graphics). A computer graphic art layout may not interest this audience. bp
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (02/19/89)
In article <3162@pixar.UUCP> bp@pixar.uucp (Bruce Perens) writes: > >One would hope that the people who actually purchase the equipment >Byte's advertisers sell DO read Byte. This group may have a more mundane >use for their equipment (like business graphics). A computer graphic art >layout may not interest this audience. Then why did they ask for computer graphic art in the first place rather than just asking for pretty pie charts ? -- Lotus Super Seven Series III. Too fast to race. BYTE computer graphics photo layout cancelled. Too many Amiga entries. richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV
karl@sugar.uu.net (Karl Lehenbauer) (02/20/89)
In article <10764@well.UUCP>, ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) writes: > I would emphasize that, at the time, I firmly believed that I had > all the relevant facts. It appears that I was in error. OK, maybe you were in error, maybe not entirely. The "technical articles last longer than images" bit was kind of lame, considering the total number of pages in Byte -- there's a lot of chatty, content-free Pournelle and Pournelle- type stuff that could be reduced or eliminated (if only it wasn't the most popular part of the magazine.) We'll know the truth when the supplement comes out. If the article comparing IBM, Mac and Amiga graphics trashes the Amiga, as I fully expect it to (for example, by negatively comparing it to VGA plus and not mentioning that the VGA card and monitor (excluding the computer) cost substantially more than an A500 including the monitor), then they'll have have convincingly demonstrated their orientation. -- -- uunet!sugar!karl | "Everyone has a purpose in life. Perhaps yours is -- karl@sugar.uu.net | watching television." -- David Letterman -- Usenet BBS (713) 438-5018
Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com (02/20/89)
> Of course BYTE cancelled their computer graphics photo layout because of
too many Amiga entries. BYTE is a PC magazine. (R. Sexton)
No way. BYTE is "The Small Systems Journal". It says right on the cover. If
it's not, that's false advertising, n'est ce pas?
Leo, thank you for printing that letter. You can be SURE I will write to
BYTE. It's not the first time. When I cancelled my subscription (I have
been buying BYTE off the newstand for about 6 years, I think) and have sub-
scribed once or twice, I wrote and said the reason was unbalanced biased
coverage and Jerry P's immature and biased editorializing. I have not bought
it since and do not intend to as long as the quality is so severely compro-
mised.
\_
)\_ _/
`/)\_ __ //
__ _____________________________________________ `\\)\_ / '~//
/// Julie Petersen (LadyHawke@cup.portal.com `\\//\\/|'//'
/// Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com) (\/Yyyy/'
__ /// "There are days when spelling Tuesday simply /Yyyy/'
\\\ /// doesn't count."- Rabbit in Winnie the Pooh //\\ LadyHawke
\\/// _______________________________________________ ///\\\ jmdavis@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Davis) (02/20/89)
In article <12296@gryphon.COM>, richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes: > In article <3162@pixar.UUCP> bp@pixar.uucp (Bruce Perens) writes: ) ) ) )One would hope that the people who actually purchase the equipment ) )Byte's advertisers sell DO read Byte. This group may have a more mundane ) )use for their equipment (like business graphics). A computer graphic art ) )layout may not interest this audience. ) ) Then why did they ask for computer graphic art in the first place ) rather than just asking for pretty pie charts ? ) -- My theory is that the person who suggested this is the only Amiga fan at BYTE. I expect that this person has since lost his or her job over the trouble that this issue has caused. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Davis ..!att!ihlpm!jmdavis char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
jdow@gryphon.COM (J. Dow) (02/21/89)
In article <10764@well.UUCP> ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo L. Schwab) writes: >[ Note: I have cancelled the original article. ] > > After posting my flame to BIX, there was a rather rapid response from >Fred Langa, Editor In Chief of BYTE Magazine. It would appear that my >original posting was formulated with incomplete facts. >all the relevant facts. It appears that I was in error. > > Schwab And I might note that Jimm was one of the real cool heads, too. I'm begining to figure AMigas really CAN be gentleman and scholars. Feels good to note that! -- Sometimes a bird in the hand leaves a sticky deposit. Perhaps it were best it remain there in the bush with the other one. {@_@} jdow@bix (where else?) Sometimes the dragon wins. Sometimes jdow@gryphon.CTS.COM the knight. Does the fair maiden ever {backbone}!gryphon!jdow win? Surely both the knight and dragon stink. Maybe the maiden should suicide? Better yet - she should get an Amiga and quit playing with dragons and knights.
jbwaters@bsu-cs.UUCP (J. Brian Waters) (02/21/89)
In article <10759@well.UUCP>, dave@well.UUCP (Dave Hughes) writes:
:> owner would just write a Naplps drawing/terminal program for the Amiga,
:> you wouldn't need Byte! You could all share your work in full, animated
:> and living color by telecommunicatins. And this is not a put-down of
:> Amigans. The Amiga would make a heck of a Naplps graphics platform,
Where can the specs for Nalps be found?
--
Brian Waters <backbone>!{iuvax|pur-ee}!bsu-cs!jbwatersdaveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (02/23/89)
in article <14857@cup.portal.com>, Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com says: > Xref: cbmvax comp.sys.amiga:32215 comp.graphics:5126 rec.mag:227 >> Of course BYTE cancelled their computer graphics photo layout because of > too many Amiga entries. BYTE is a PC magazine. (R. Sexton) > No way. BYTE is "The Small Systems Journal". It says right on the cover. The operative word here is "said". It doesn't say that any more. BYTE is currently a PC magazine, which an occasional bit of Macintosh thrown in as a token "non-PC" system. > /// Julie Petersen (LadyHawke@cup.portal.com `\\//\\/|'//' -- Dave Haynie "The 32 Bit Guy" Commodore-Amiga "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: D-DAVE H BIX: hazy Amiga -- It's not just a job, it's an obsession
jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) (02/23/89)
In article <14857@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: >> Of course BYTE cancelled their computer graphics photo layout because of > too many Amiga entries. BYTE is a PC magazine. (R. Sexton) As it turns out, this was NOT the reason. In fact, they put one of the entries for that on the cover instead. The entry was created on an Amiga. So please, don't cry wolf too much, it doesn't help the Amiga community to get a reputation for that (it already has too much of it now). Oh, and don't forget they replaced the pictures with a comparison of the Amiga's, Mac's, and (something elses) graphics capabilities. The type of article I do want to see in byte. I haven't seen the article, but having Amiga in the comparison (and having a comparison at all) is a step forward. >No way. BYTE is "The Small Systems Journal". It says right on the cover. If >it's not, that's false advertising, n'est ce pas? I agree Byte has gone way downhill, BUT it has been getting better in the last year or so (last febuary was the low point in my mind - it annoyed me so much I started a giant discussion on BIX about it - it turned out the (then) new editor, Fred Langa, agreed. We disagree on a number of points, but he HAS improved it in the last year. >Leo, thank you for printing that letter. You can be SURE I will write to >BYTE. It's not the first time. When I cancelled my subscription (I have >been buying BYTE off the newstand for about 6 years, I think) and have sub- >scribed once or twice, I wrote and said the reason was unbalanced biased >coverage and Jerry P's immature and biased editorializing. I have not bought >it since and do not intend to as long as the quality is so severely compro- >mised. Sure, Jerry is not know for his restraint or unbiased reporting. He can be a real pain at times. But he does write well. If you write Byte, don't say "put more amiga articles in". Say "more technical articles, less reviews." If they have more technical articles, more amiga articles will come, I'm quite sure. It's the damn PC reviews that are/were crowding out everything else. And try to avoid sounding like a net flame.... :-) Net-style flames aren't likely to get read real well... :-) -- Randell Jesup, Commodore Engineering {uunet|rutgers|allegra}!cbmvax!jesup
todd@stiatl.UUCP (Todd Merriman) (02/23/89)
In article <6048@cbmvax.UUCP> daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) writes: > >> No way. BYTE is "The Small Systems Journal". It says right on the cover. > It should be called "The Small Minds Journal". I don't intend to read another issue. ...!gatech!stiatl!todd Todd Merriman 404-377-8638 Atlanta, GA
ewhac@well.UUCP (Leo 'Bols Ewhac' Schwab) (02/23/89)
In article <14857@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: >BYTE is "The Small Systems Journal". It says right on the cover. [ ... ] Not anymore. Go look; it's not there. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Leo L. Schwab -- The Guy in The Cape INET: well!ewhac@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU \_ -_ Recumbent Bikes: UUCP: pacbell > !{well,unicom}!ewhac O----^o The Only Way To Fly. hplabs / (pronounced "AE-wack") "Work FOR? I don't work FOR anybody! I'm just having fun." -- The Doctor
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (02/23/89)
In <5806@bsu-cs.UUCP>, jbwaters@bsu-cs.UUCP (J. Brian Waters) writes: >Where can the specs for Nalps be found? It is available as a book, called "Videotex/Teletext Presentation Level Protocol Syntax", and is the ANSI X3.110-1983 as well as the CSA T500-1983 standard. If you are in Canada, any "Queen's Printer" office can sell it to you for about $40 Cdn. If you are in the US, you are on your own for finding it locally, since I have no idea who might carry it. You can also order it from: American National Standards Institute 1430 Broadway NY, NY, 10018 or in Canada from: Canadian Standards Association 178 Rexdale Boulevard Rexdale (Toronto), Ontario, M9W 1R3 Be prepeared for a heavy read. It's 158 pages, 8.5 * 11", of some of the most convoluted protocol you ever saw. Actually, once you have all the character sets figured out, and fathom the basic premise of the protocol it isn't all that bad. Its usefulness is somewhat in question tough. Not much of it around any more. -larry -- Frisbeetarianism: The belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck. +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca or uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) (02/24/89)
In article <6050@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes: >In article <14857@cup.portal.com> Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com writes: >>> Of course BYTE cancelled their computer graphics photo layout because of >> too many Amiga entries. BYTE is a PC magazine. (R. Sexton) > > As it turns out, this was NOT the reason. In fact, they put one >of the entries for that on the cover instead. The entry was created on >an Amiga. So please, don't cry wolf too much, it doesn't help the Amiga >community to get a reputation for that (it already has too much of it now). > > Oh, and don't forget they replaced the pictures with a comparison of >the Amiga's, Mac's, and (something elses) graphics capabilities. The type >of article I do want to see in byte. I haven't seen the article, but having >Amiga in the comparison (and having a comparison at all) is a step forward. Well I don't really acre what they claim their reasons were. If they'd said ``we're having a computer graphics art layout which we will later cancel'' I for one would not have felt too much like sending something in. AmigaWorld used to have a ``gallery'' for the first few issues. It was probablythe best thing about Amiga world. They havnt done it for a while, and AW hasnt been worth reading for a while. I can understand that a comparison of Amiga's vs whatever in is probably good for C= sales, but c'mon, out of 300+ pages, of mostly PC junk advertising, they couldnt spare 4 pages in which they could have put 8 (albeit small) pictures per side, which could have given us 64 of the pictures. Or they could have published a few (4 ? 7?) of the pictures with the article. How many pictures DID they get made on other machines anyway ? Perhaps it wasnt cancelled because there were too many Amiga pictures. Perhaps it was cancelled because there were no pictures made on other computers. > If you write Byte, don't say "put more amiga articles in". Say >"more technical articles, less reviews." If they have more technical articles, >more amiga articles will come, I'm quite sure. It's the damn PC reviews that >are/were crowding out everything else. How bout less techie stuff ane more pictures ? How bout a monthly gallery column ? -- Lotus Super Seven Series III. Too fast to race. BYTE computer graphics photo layout cancelled. Too many Amiga entries. richard@gryphon.COM decwrl!gryphon!richard gryphon!richard@elroy.jpl.NASA.GOV