dean@coplex.UUCP (Dean Brooks) (01/11/91)
So,
Here we have WorkBench 2.0. It has been over 1 and 1/2 years past
its original anticipated release date. Only owners of 3000's, dealers
and Commercial Developers have 2.0, and its on disk rather than in ROM.
So, what exactly are they doing at Commodore? Beta-Testing?
Chi-Testing? The most heard complaint of Amiga equipment is the old
WorkBench system, yet Commodore seems to want to wait until the
hardware is obsolete.
As an avid Amiga owner, and a very proud and productive user, what
exactly is the status of WB2.0 for the 2000 series (or 500 for that
matter). Is it possible to place orders yet? Is it possible for me to
pay $600.00 and get a copy (of WB2.0) NOW?
Basically, to rehash an old topic, why is it still buried deep inside
Commodore, away from the most popular Amiga models? And when will they
actually let someone (besides proud A3000 owners) use it?
--
dean@coplex.UUCP Dean A. Brooks
Copper Electronics, Inc.
Louisville, Ky
UUCP: !uunet!coplex!deanmartin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Daniel Martin) (01/11/91)
In article <241@coplex.UUCP> dean@coplex.UUCP (Dean Brooks) writes: > Here we have WorkBench 2.0. It has been over 1 and 1/2 years past >its original anticipated release date. Only owners of 3000's, dealers >and Commercial Developers have 2.0, and its on disk rather than in ROM. Sure of that? 2.0 was never released for A500/1000/2000. > So, what exactly are they doing at Commodore? Beta-Testing? >Chi-Testing? The most heard complaint of Amiga equipment is the old >WorkBench system, yet Commodore seems to want to wait until the >hardware is obsolete. > The same people who wants 2.0 now, would be very unpleased if the new release they paid for was bug ridden. In fact, yes 2.0 is still in the testing phaze. I believe it will be release on ROM *SOON*. > As an avid Amiga owner, and a very proud and productive user, what >exactly is the status of WB2.0 for the 2000 series (or 500 for that >matter). WB2.0 can be use right now on a 500/2000 (with extra ram). When committed to ROM (I.e. as bug free as possible), I think they'll turn their attention to upgrade the OS of the whole amiga family. If not, well... amiga users are inventive. > Is it possible to place orders yet? Is it possible for me to >pay $600.00 and get a copy (of WB2.0) NOW? You can always send your check! :-) > Basically, to rehash an old topic, why is it still buried deep inside >Commodore, away from the most popular Amiga models? And when will they >actually let someone (besides proud A3000 owners) use it? Basically, to rehash an old topic: -> When it will be ready. <- When I bought a A3000, I received a sheet saying that OS2.0 is still beta. That meant possible bugs and troubles. And in the beginning it had quite a few of them (I used 1.3 for a while, since I had to work!). All revision up to now (2.04) fixes important bugs. You can't expect to let every amiga users use a beta versions of an OS, without MAJOR problems. For instance what would think a business upgrading to 2.0 (with honest hopes), when they see that their favorite softwares doesn't work properly or that the OS sometimes thrash their HardDisks? What would YOU think if just before printing a session report at 5:00 AM the partition where this file is located becomes corrupted? So, they'll release 2.0 when it will be ready. >dean@coplex.UUCP Dean A. Brooks -- // Daniel Martin Universite de Montreal \\ // MediaLab, ca vous regarde! C.P. 6128, Succursale A, \\ \\// Mail: martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA Montreal (Quebec), CANADA, \\// \/ Tel.: (514) 343-6111 poste 3494 H3C 3J7 \/
dannie@coplex.UUCP (Dannie Gregoire) (01/12/91)
martin@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Daniel Martin) writes: >> So, what exactly are they doing at Commodore? Beta-Testing? >>Chi-Testing? The most heard complaint of Amiga equipment is the old >>WorkBench system, yet Commodore seems to want to wait until the >>hardware is obsolete. >> > The same people who wants 2.0 now, would be very unpleased if the >new release they paid for was bug ridden. In fact, yes 2.0 is still >in the testing phaze. I believe it will be release on ROM *SOON*. > When I bought a A3000, I received a sheet saying that OS2.0 is still >beta. That meant possible bugs and troubles. And in the beginning it >had quite a few of them (I used 1.3 for a while, since I had to work!). >All revision up to now (2.04) fixes important bugs. > You can't expect to let every amiga users use a beta versions of an OS, >without MAJOR problems. For instance what would think a business >upgrading to 2.0 (with honest hopes), when they see that their favorite >softwares doesn't work properly or that the OS sometimes thrash their >HardDisks? What would YOU think if just before printing a session >report at 5:00 AM the partition where this file is located becomes >corrupted? I'd be much more pleased to be a happy commodore owner willingly knowing that I am going to be getting a beta OS, rather than pay $3500 for a new A3000 with a buggy OS! (Yes I know you can switch to 1.3 on the 3000 but what's the point??) You mention that you do not what high end users to end up with a buggy OS. Well, that is precisly what has happened. The higher end/business users have most likely purchased an A3000 and have the buggy OS ripping away their file partitions as we speak ;-) There are countless loyal A500 and A2000 users who are VERY willing to contiue this BETA test if that's what the 2.0 delay is all about. IMHO a beta test should not be conducted in such a manner. a BETA test should be conducted amongst people who a rigorously testing the ins and outs and report all problems. It should not be conducted amonst the general public. Despite Commodore's testing techniques, it is taking them a hell of a long time!! Perhaps if their test was conducted a little more orderly it would not take so long to get 2.0 to market! Dannie Gregoire Copper Electronics dannie@coplex
ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug Dyer) (01/12/91)
Aaah, that explains it. Ive still got 2.02, and a correction... CD ////// forces a complete reset. Oh well. -- "I/O's revenge is at hand." - Hennessy & Patterson
zerkle@iris.ucdavis.edu (Dan Zerkle) (01/12/91)
I've already sent obnoxious mail to all of you, but....
This thread doesn't belong in .marketplace. .marketplace is about
"for sale" and "wanted" notices, with occasional forays into questions
like "where can I get the best price on memory chips?" Or "does
Montgomery Grant have a good reputation?"
This thread belongs in comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. Notice from my
Newsgroups: line that this message is cross-posted to both .advocacy
and to .marketplace, and from the Followup-To: line that any followups
you make will be re-directed to .advocacy. This effectively moves the
thread (for anyone who responds to you) over from .marketplace to
.advocacy. You can do this yourself when you just HAVE to respond to
something, yet you think it is in the wrong newsgroup.
As Robocop said: "Thank you for your cooperation!"
Dan Zerkle zerkle@iris.eecs.ucdavis.edu (916) 754-0240
Amiga... Because life is too short for boring computers.cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) (01/12/91)
>As for CBM's patience in releasing 2.0 to the "general" public. I think that >with the next 2.0 update (soon) everyone will be using the same 2.0....and >with SCALEABLE fonts!! > What!? The real live Compugraphic-like scaleable fonts that were very officially NOT going to be in WB2.0? The ones that AmigaWorld and Amazing wrote wistfully about in dreams about Workbench 3? Are you certain about this? -- // / Thom Cleland / It is easier / // / tcleland@ucsd.edu / to get forgiveness / \X/ / ASOCC * Amiga Users' Group at UCSD / than permission... / \____________________________________\____________________/
rjc@wookumz.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (01/12/91)
In article <15549@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> cleland@sdbio2.ucsd.edu (Thomas Cleland) writes: >>As for CBM's patience in releasing 2.0 to the "general" public. I think that >>with the next 2.0 update (soon) everyone will be using the same 2.0....and >>with SCALEABLE fonts!! >> > >What!? The real live Compugraphic-like scaleable fonts that OB>were very officially NOT going to be in WB2.0? The ones that >AmigaWorld and Amazing wrote wistfully about in dreams about >Workbench 3? > >Are you certain about this? I heard they were going to be BITMAP Scalable fonts. In the same manner high-res pictures are scalable by things like PBM, TAD, etc. Scaling small fonts slightly bigger will look good, but blowing them up to full screen will still be chunky. It is still a nice addition IMHO! CG/Adobe Outline/Vector fonts will probably have to wait awhile. If you noticed, CBM just posted a job request looking for 'Senior Outline Font programmer.' This most likely means they don't have one yet and are looking for one. Again, what I heard is a rumor. They may actually be CG fonts since I heard about BITMAP Scalable fonts back in September with another rumor that said 'Comodore plans to add CG fonts hopefully in 2.1'. Well its now January, so who knows? >-- > // / Thom Cleland / It is easier / > // / tcleland@ucsd.edu / to get forgiveness / >\X/ / ASOCC * Amiga Users' Group at UCSD / than permission... / > \____________________________________\____________________/
dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Colin DeWolfe) (01/12/91)
In article <12587@hubcap.clemson.edu> ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug Dyer) writes: > > > >Aaah, that explains it. Ive still got 2.02, and a correction... CD ////// >forces a complete reset. That's funny, I have 2.02 and get a "can't find /" message... > >Oh well. >-- >"I/O's revenge is at hand." - Hennessy & Patterson -- Colin DeWolfe dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca
skank@iastate.edu (Skank George L) (01/12/91)
article <12582@hubcap.clemson.edu> ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug Dyer) writes: > >Here's my favorite OS2.0 bug. At a root directory, type CD / >(or CD ///////, one or more /'s than the level you are in the directory >tree). The shell crashes. > >Seems like that would be an easy one for them to have caught. Try formatting a floppy from workbench and checking your hard drive for bad blocks with HDToolbox at the same time. I locked up my machine... (I also had commodities exchange, autopoint, and blanker running in the background). -- -- George L. Skank |skank@iastate.edu Fast cars, fast women, fast computers...| (not necessarily in that order) |
bruce@zuhause.MN.ORG (Bruce Albrecht) (01/13/91)
>In article <12587@hubcap.clemson.edu> ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug Dyer) writes: > > > >Aaah, that explains it. Ive still got 2.02, and a correction... CD ////// >forces a complete reset. So do I, and it returns "Can't find ////////". Are you running on a 3000? If not, perhaps one of your upgrades was installed improperly. -- bruce@zuhause.mn.org
jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) (01/16/91)
In article <1991Jan12.064328.411@news.iastate.edu> skank@iastate.edu (Skank George L) writes: >article <12582@hubcap.clemson.edu> ddyer@hubcap.clemson.edu (Doug Dyer) writes: >> >>Here's my favorite OS2.0 bug. At a root directory, type CD / > Try formatting a floppy from workbench and checking your hard drive for >bad blocks with HDToolbox at the same time. I locked up my machine... (I >also had commodities exchange, autopoint, and blanker running in the >background). Did you report it to bugs@cbmvax.commodore.com? Earlier versions of 2.0 (certainly 36.141/143 (2.0/2.01)) had a problem caused by assumptions about the state of the SIGF_SINGLE bit that could cause SCSI bus lockups, though it was only seen while hdtoolbox was scanning the bus for drives. It could be demonstrated by moving windows around (particularily if they had text being output) while hdtoolbox was starting up. It was quite reliable in the normal case of just starting it up, which was why it was not noticed before the very first release (also an earlier bug in another module had been hiding it until shortly before release). It think (fairly sure, I don't feel like checking the database right now) that bug was fixed before the 2.02 (36.207) release. Development of 2.0 is ongoing (witness 2.02, and developers have access to even newer, and better, versions). We work hard to fix all bugs that are reported to us; if they're not reported we may not notice them ourselves. Report bugs _RSN_ if you don't want to be stuck with them for quite a while to come. bugs@cbmvax.commodore.com is _not_ a black hole, it all goes into an internal database, and is priority and severity sorted and dealt with by the module owner. -- Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com BIX: rjesup The compiler runs Like a swift-flowing river I wait in silence. (From "The Zen of Programming") ;-)
walrus@wam.umd.edu (Udo K Schuermann) (05/06/91)
In article <241@coplex.UUCP> dean@coplex.UUCP (Dean Brooks) writes: > So, what exactly are they doing at Commodore? Beta-Testing? >Chi-Testing? The most heard complaint of Amiga equipment is the old >WorkBench system, yet Commodore seems to want to wait until the >hardware is obsolete. Commodore is refusing to make the same mistake again that they did with 1.0, which was so unstable that it should never have been released at all. When 2.0 becomes available (and I don't think it will be much longer!) you can be sure that it will not only be stable but also offer you very good compatibility with older software. For some people the wait may not be a satisfactory tradeoff, but consider what the alternatives are. As to obsolete hardware, I can only say that "so long as it does the job, why complain?" Commodore has released the 3000, and other hardware limitations are being addressed, I'm sure. They're not standing still! It takes some effort to do it right. > Is it possible to place orders yet? Is it possible for me to pay > $600.00 and get a copy (of WB2.0) NOW? Unless you want to buy a 3000 or become a registered developer, you can't get 2.0 until it is released to the public at large. It's been said that the Usenet community will be among the first to know when the ROMs are available. ._. Udo Schuermann "Does he talk? DOES HE TALK?" -- "Of course I talk. ( ) walrus@wam.umd.edu I'm the Minister for Internal Affairs." -- M.Python