grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham Thomas) (04/06/90)
I've just been sent the first edition of Atari UK's new newsletter for developers. It announces their new ProSupport programme. The tone of the announcement is appropriately self-deprecating. An example: "For those of you reeling from the shock of seeing Atari doing something positive for the developers, there will be a short pause in this the first Atari ProSupport newsletter, while you recover your composure..." What it all boils down to is that Atari UK have appointed a co-ordinator (Alistair Bodin) to pass on information to developers and answer their queries. Atari will run several conferences on CIX (the UK equivalent of BIX in the USA) and developers can also get in touch by fax, snailmail and telephone. Developers have to reregister (at no cost) for the programme, and show that they're really producing commercial products for Atari machines (any machine, from the transputer workstation to the Lynx - no separate companies here). If you want to join, you have to sign a severe confidentiality agreement. As with all such agreements, most of the wording is taken up with the obligations of the developers not to reveal anything said to them. It includes the provision that 'neither party shall publicly announce or disclose the existence of this agreement..', which I find a bit bizarre. The newsletter admits there is a problem about knowing what should be secret, but 'information that seems widely circulated may still be sensitive. Therefore you must assume everything is secret.' There's lots more about the need for confidentiality, and the dreadful consequences of breaking it, but I don't want to overemphasize this at the expense of the good news about the programme. I hope it becomes a success, and that a better relationship develops between Atari and the UK software-writing community. My only worry is the same one that was aired about the equivalent programme in the USA: the emphasis on people and companies which develop programmes for commercial distribution. I hope it doesn't exclude people who prefer to distribute their programs via shareware or even not charge for them at all. The focus should be on the software, not the distribution method. Let's hope it works out. Graham -- Graham Thomas, SPRU, Mantell Building, U of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RF, UK JANET: grahamt@uk.ac.sussex.syma EARN/BITNET: grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk ARPA: grahamt%syma.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk UUCP: grahamt@syma.uucp Phone: +44 273 686758 Fax: +44 273 685865
ncastellano@eagle.wesleyan.edu (04/08/90)
In article <2468@syma.sussex.ac.uk>, grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham Thomas) writes: > them. It includes the provision that 'neither party shall publicly > announce or disclose the existence of this agreement..', which I find a > bit bizarre. The newsletter admits there is a problem about knowing But it managed to get posted to comp.sys.atari.st ....hmm. ncastellano@eagle.wesleyan.edu ncastellano@wesleyan.bitnet dEADHEAd%sinkhole.citadel@moundst.mn.org