chasm@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Charles Marslett) (09/05/88)
In article <3517@druhi.ATT.COM>, med@druhi.ATT.COM (Myron Drapal) writes:
:: > From uucp Wed Aug 31 20:17 MDT 1988
:: > >From ames.arc.nasa.gov!uucp!atari!apratt Wed Aug 31 12:03:34 PDT 1988 remote from arpa
:: > Received: Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:07:38 PDT by ames.arc.nasa.gov (5.59/1.2)
:: > Received: by atari.UUCP (4.12/4.7)
:: > id AA12987; Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:03:34 pdt
:: > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 88 12:03:34 pdt
:: > From: atari!apratt@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Allan Pratt)
:: > Message-Id: <8808311903.AA12987@atari.UUCP>
:: > To: ames!med@druhi.ATT.COM
:: > Subject: BETA TOS
:: >
:: > In article <3451@druhi.ATT.COM> you write:
:: > > Well, Allan, I really hate to rain on your parade again, but this stuff
:: > > about the new format being compatible with the PC is just not true...
:: > > At least not in the BETA ROMS...
:: >
:: > PLEASE DO NOT USE NEWS TO REPORT BUGS IN UNRELEASED ATARI PRODUCTS.
:: >
:: > Am I making myself clear?
:: 1. NETNEWS was the accepted forum for bug reporting, especially when
:: Landon and Alex were employed at Atari.
::
:: In fact, discussions usually included the report of the
:: bug, followed by discussions from developers and the Atari
:: folks regarding how the bug was noticed (reproducibility)
:: and even possible solutions, both long term and short term.
:: In particular, the 40 folder bug was solved this way.
I might add, that a forum like Netnews is rather less useful if it can be used
only to say nice things about Atari.
:: 2. Most registered developers have not been receiving updated documents
:: or information regarding new bug report procedures.
:: I have been a registered Atari ST devloper for over two
:: years. I have yet to receive any update notices, new
:: documentation (the GDOS documents that some registered
:: developers got a few months back), nor was I notified
:: that the new TOS 1.4 was being made availble to BETA sites.
:: I know this isn't your fault (Allan and Roy), but you are
:: the only people from Atari on the NET that seem to listen.
:: Where is the support?
:: I realize that $300 is not much if you consider the entire
:: development cost of the ST. It is, however, a significant
:: investment to those of us who don't have money to burn. . .
Again, I might add that I have been a registered developer since before
the Atari ST's were publicly available (one of the THREE THOUSAND DOLLAR
registered developers), and I have not received any information directly
from Atari EVER, AT ALL. What little information I get that is not
broadcast by non-Atari personnel to the net, etc., comes from the Atari
developer's forum (where they did at least consider me enough of a developer
to unlock the registered sub-forum). Is everything lost in the mail?
:: 3. Instructions for reporting bugs should be made available to all
:: owners - not just a few "selected" registered developers.
:: Even a person who owns an ST and only runs 1st Word should
:: be able to report a problem to you. They may be using the
:: system in a way that none of us could possibly dream of.
:: If there had been such an approved method of reporting bugs
:: and it had been distributed to all owners (simply through
:: Compuserve, NETNEWS, etc.), this whole issue would not have
:: happened at all.
Here all I can say is, "Yes, we should have a way other than flames on the
net to pass information around." Specifically, Atari should do something
(since I have seen nothing official or unofficial that would summarize what
problems Atari is aware of, or working on, or doesn't care one way or the other
about) to inform registered developers, unregistered developers, former
customers, et al., about what bugs are present in the ROMs, which are being
fixed and which are to become "features".
And I suspect if such a list were made public, many other bugs would be
made known simply because the ones who have uncovered them have assumed
the bugs to be common knowledge, unrepairable, uninteresting or whatever.
Whether true or not, Atari appears to have very little interest in me, and
I am reciprocating. Being very stubborn, I still have several thousand dollars
worth of Atari gear, and I occasionally work on an Atari project. But I have
not reccommended an Atari ST for any reason for a long time.
Charles Marslett
Wordmark Systems
2705 Pinewood Dr.
Garland, TX 75044
chasm@killer.dallas.tx.usapratt@atari.UUCP (Allan Pratt) (09/07/88)
In article <5417@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> chasm@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Charles Marslett) writes: > I might add, that a forum like Netnews is rather less useful if it can be > used only to say nice things about Atari. On the contrary. But Netnews should NOT be used to say incorrect, bad things about UNRELEASED, PRELIMINARY, TEST VERSIONS of Atari products. If I were under contract to do a computer simulation on a new design for a car from Ford, and I found a bug in the design, I wouldn't write a letter to the editor of Auto Week about it. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt