ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) (12/05/88)
In article <29@sdcc10.ucsd.EDU> cs161agc@sdcc10.ucsd.edu.UUCP (John Schultz) writes: >In article <14103@cisunx.UUCP> ejkst@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (Eric J. Kennedy) writes: >>In the December AmigaWorld, in the Buyer's guide, >>there is the Microsoft C Optomizing >>Compiler 5.0 and Microsoft Quick C. Does anybody have any more definite > Yah, know, I'll bet they are refering to these products available >for an Amiga 2000 with the bridgeboard; MS/PC-DOS. Besides, >wouldn't a first run product be 1.0, AOT 5.0? Oooh, that would be particularly slimy, now, wouldn't it? Not that I wouldn't put it past Microsoft. Of course, if AmigaWorld wanted to include MS-DOS software, their buyers guide would've been the size of a New York City telephone book. If this _is_ an Amiga product, then they might very well want to call it version 5.0, since that's what the current DOS version is, or was not too long ago, anyway. Besides, did you ever hear of Lattice C 1.0, Aztec C 1.0, or WordPerfect 1.0? It's not an unusual practice to retain the version number on a port to another computer.
ncreed@ndsuvax.UUCP (W. Reed) (12/06/88)
(Eric J. Kennedy) writes: (someone else wrote) >> Yah, know, I'll bet they are refering to these products available >>for an Amiga 2000 with the bridgeboard; MS/PC-DOS. Besides, >>wouldn't a first run product be 1.0, AOT 5.0? >If this _is_ an Amiga product, then they might very well want to call it >version 5.0, since that's what the current DOS version is, or was not too Huh? Dos 5.0? Gee, and I only had amigados 1.3 and msdos 4.0 just came out. Whose DOS do you use? Unix Sys V? <<yucko, give me BSD. >long ago, anyway. Besides, did you ever hear of Lattice C 1.0, Aztec C >1.0, or WordPerfect 1.0? It's not an unusual practice to retain the >version number on a port to another computer. Anyway, when I called MicroSloth (sp? :-) The person I talked to said that they couldn't comment on unreleased products. So, does that mean that the product does exist but they can't say anything about it? :-) I just hope that this product for the amiga is better than the BASIC they offer which has the SLOWEST editor I have EVER seen in my life! It's worse than TextCrud (I mean craft...) It also has those anoying requesters that require a mouse (dirty little rodent.) Geeze Commodore, get on those guys butts and have them rewrite the thing. Their bad programming makes YOUR machine look bad. You put that cruddy thing on your distribution disks... I do admit that I havent used basic since 1.1 though. ------ Walter Reed .signature gone until the filesystem where my home directory lies on gets fixed. A bad block won't let it mount. And I thought the Amiga had disk problems!!
ejkst@cisunx.UUCP (Eric J. Kennedy) (12/08/88)
In article <1896@ndsuvax.UUCP> ncreed@ndsuvax.UUCP (W. Reed) writes: >(Eric J. Kennedy) writes: >>If this _is_ an Amiga product, then they might very well want to call it >>version 5.0, since that's what the current DOS version is, or was not too >Huh? Dos 5.0? Gee, and I only had amigados 1.3 and msdos 4.0 just came out. >Whose DOS do you use? Unix Sys V? <<yucko, give me BSD. Sorry, I wasn't clear. The version number of the DOS version (MS-DOS, that is) of the Microsoft C compiler is 5.0. The compiler is 5.0, not the DOS. -- Eric Kennedy ejkst@cisunx.UUCP
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (12/09/88)
I agree totally; Amigabasic could definitely use some cleaning up! That editor is really yucky! It seems like the windows wind up getting in the way more than they do helping out. Walter also pointed out one of my Amigabasic pet peeves - those naughty little requesters that say "Sayntax error OK?" that don't go away until moused. I just saw Microsloth's Quickbasic 4.0 for the IBM world yesterday .. that is what Amigabasic should be like. I'm no big fan of the boys from Redmond, but I actually like qb 4.0. My vote would have been to keep the ABasiC that was distributed with the Amiga O/S version 1.0 and fix it up. I liked ABasiC as it was relatively lean and mean compared to Amigabasic. I still find myself using ABasiC for prototyping things, as it isn't braindamaged about the serial port as is Amigabasic. I wrote a simple Midi librarian for my DX7 in ABasiC using the AUX: device driver posted to the net. I tried Amigabasic, but it strips all the non printable characters from the serial port I/O (and it doesn't go up to 31.5 Kbaud needed for Midi either). --Bill