Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com (03/04/91)
This is a copy of a letter I have just sent to CBM. (Let the FLAMES
begin!)
Lee R Willis
Loral Defense Systems
590 Eleanora Drive
Cuyahoga Falls, OH 44223
Commodore Amiga
1200 West Wilson Drive
West Chester, PA 19380-4231
Dear Sirs,
I bought my Amiga 500 in 1987 and have been very pleased with it.
It's a great little machine. The A500 has been my machine to play on.
('play' being defined as creating art, music, ray-traced animations,
etc. Not video games). There are a lot of fun things the A500 does
that simply can't be done on a standard PC. Because of this, I have
sung the Amiga's praises far and wide. I'm sure my associates think
I'm a bit of a fanatic on the subject.
Recently I decided that I needed a business computer. (I'm a software
engineer at a defense contractor, and as such, I produce a lot of
paper, from 1 page memos to 500 page design documents, all of which
are usually filled with flow charts, data flow diagrams, etc..) Since
I like my A500 so much, I bought an A3000. I checked all my back
issues of AmigaWorld, and bought what looked like the best word
processor (ProWrite, by New Horizons), and the only structured drawing
program (ProfessionalDraw, by Gold Disk).
I thought a top-of-the-line Amiga outfitted with some real business
software would be better than (or at least as good as) the standard
office PCs or Macs.
Boy, was I wrong!
ProWrite does not handle footnotes, endnotes, paragraph numbering,
multiple columns, or structured drawings. All of these features are
necessary for professional work. Plus, its print quality is horrid
(as you can see).
So I started checking into the other Amiga word processors. There
aren't any that fulfill the above requirements! WordPerfect comes
closest, since the only feature it lacks is graphic and multiple font
support. (WordPerfect 5 has this, but is not available for the
Amiga.) Unfortunately, WordPerfect has a poor user interface.
This is pathetic. These features have been available for years on PC
and Macintosh platforms. I can create a more professional looking
document on an ancient PC XT using Lotus Manuscript than I can on my
25 Megahertz, 68030 powered A3000.
As for ProfessionalDraw, it is actually very powerful for doing
Desktop Publishing. I don't want to do Desktop Publishing. I want to
do simple structured drawings, such as Data Flow Diagrams.
ProfessionalDraw is lousy for this kind of work! It's too slow.
There is no simple way to put arrowheads on the ends of lines. Text
takes forever to display. etc. Unfortunately, its the only game in
town. ProfessionalDraw is the only structured drawing program for the
Amiga that is not targetted at CAD work.
Normally I wouldn't bother chewing your ear off over software you
didn't write. The A3000 is a great piece of hardware, and you did a
wonderful job on AmigaDOS 2.0. But a computer is nothing without
software. Word processing and structured drawing programs are a must!
This complete lack of competent business software is a serious problem
for the A3000. While I have recommended the A500 to many people, I
cannot recommend the A3000 to anyone. If I had realized how poor the
Amiga word processors were, I would have purchased a PC or Mac
instead. Granted, they don't multitask, but they can do the work I
need to accomplish. It makes no sense to spend over $3,000 for a
computer without a decent word processor. CBM desperately needs to
woo some software house to write or port some professional business
software.
I sincerely hope this situation will change in the near future. In
the meantime, my only hope of building an office environment on my
A3000 is to buy AMAX.
Sincerely,
Lee R WillisDoug_B_Erdely@cup.portal.com (03/05/91)
SO? What does this have to do with Commodore? Try writing the software companies that write this trash! Let THEM know what you think of THEIR software! - Doug - Doug_B_Erdely@Cup.Portal.Com
Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com (03/05/91)
>SO? What does this have to do with Commodore? Try writing the software >companies that write this trash! Let THEM know what you think of THEIR >software! > > - Doug - > >Doug_B_Erdely@Cup.Portal.Com I have written a letter to New Horizons explaining the features I feel are missing from ProWrite. (I also tell them the existing features I do like) I have not yet written Gold Disk (authors of ProfDraw), because I am not yet as completely familiar with their product as I like to be before I send a bitch&moan letter. I want to be able to include specific examples, and I'm still collating my list. Also, the situations are not the same. ProWrite is underkill for what I need, and my letter suggests adding features. ProfessionalDraw is overkill. It gives me more power than I can use at the expense of simplicity and speed. My letter to Gold Disk will suggest creating a scaled-down version ('ProfDraw Jr.', or 'AmateurDraw', or some such), which would be a drawing package more like MacDraw or GEMDraw for the PC. Lee
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/06/91)
In article <39850@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: >ProfessionalDraw is overkill. It gives me more power than I can use at the >expense of simplicity and speed. I recommend making sure you use Version 2 of ProDraw. It's much faster than the original in many areas, especially text. This kind of program is really designed for doing illustrations and things, not simple box and line figures. I have used it extensively in my Zorro III bus documentation, and I'm pretty satisfied with the way it handles technical drawing. I haven't used it for any more free-flowing stuff. Of course, I also have a fast system. >My letter to Gold Disk will suggest creating a scaled-down version >('ProfDraw Jr.', or 'AmateurDraw', or some such), which would be a drawing >package more like MacDraw or GEMDraw for the PC. You might just ring a bell with that approach. Gold Disk does still support PageSetter, which at this point amounts to a scaled down version of ProPage. You might also check out ProVector, which is another vector drawing (as opposed to CAD) program out for the Amiga, and the first to support the IFF structured drawing form, DR2D. I haven't tried it myself yet, but it looks very nice and I would be willing to switch over if I like it that much better. However, complaining about a tool being too powerful is rarely a valid point when you claim to come from a business prespective. A business will rarely make such complaints, and if the tool runs too slow, they'll buy a faster system. Witness the success of Ventura Publisher and AutoCAD on the PC. Both are slow as snails and full of features. But a business will pay for a fast '386 or '486 in order to use them productively. You would want something less on your C= Colt at home. Now, both of these are more mature products than ProDraw, so they have pretty much eliminated "slowness for no good reason", something Gold Disk could spend just a little more time on. As for real document processing, while I have done a nearly 100 page document in ProPage, I did it there mainly because of the graphics I needed. For any mainly textual work, especially something on the order of 500-1000 pages, no wordprocessor of any kind is going to compare to TeX. It's not WYSIWYG (though the Amiga previewer might make you forget much of this), but it was designed for typesetting large documents and is inherently faster to work with than any WYSIWYG wordprocessor, or even partially markup wordprocessors like WordPerfect on the Amiga. >Lee -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "What works for me might work for you" -Jimmy Buffett
cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (03/06/91)
Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes:
[ In a letter to Commodore... ]
<
< ProWrite does not handle footnotes, endnotes, paragraph numbering,
< multiple columns, or structured drawings. All of these features are
< necessary for professional work. Plus, its print quality is horrid
< (as you can see).
It sounds as though you may be using ProWrite 2.5. Although I haven't
upgraded yet, it is my understanding that ProWrite 3.1 contains most,
if not all, of the features you mention. Also, New Horizons markets
a product called 'ProScript', which will convert your document into
a standard Postscript file, which can then be printed using a number
of (commercial and shareware) Postscript interpreters for the Amiga,
or can be sent directly to a Postscript printer (I have used an
Apple LaserWriter IINT with no trouble).
< So I started checking into the other Amiga word processors. There
< aren't any that fulfill the above requirements! WordPerfect comes
< closest, since the only feature it lacks is graphic and multiple font
< support. (WordPerfect 5 has this, but is not available for the
< Amiga.) Unfortunately, WordPerfect has a poor user interface.
Given WordPerfect's track record, I wouldn't hold my breath for any
major improvements, at least not any time soon.
< This is pathetic. These features have been available for years on PC
< and Macintosh platforms. I can create a more professional looking
< document on an ancient PC XT using Lotus Manuscript than I can on my
< 25 Megahertz, 68030 powered A3000.
Perhaps you have some misconceptions about the function of a word
processor. Word processors are (in the purest sense) intended to
manipulate words into a coherent, logical format. Anything beyond this
really belongs to the realm of desktop publishing.
I would ask you one question. Does Lotus Manuscript allow you to
import structured drawings? If so, which formats are supported?
In all the years I used word processors on the PC (Wordstar, WordPerfect,
Micorsoft Word), I never found one that would do this. Of course,
things may have changed in the year or so that I have been away
from the PC environment.
< As for ProfessionalDraw, it is actually very powerful for doing
< Desktop Publishing. I don't want to do Desktop Publishing. I want to
< do simple structured drawings, such as Data Flow Diagrams.
< ProfessionalDraw is lousy for this kind of work! It's too slow.
< There is no simple way to put arrowheads on the ends of lines. Text
< takes forever to display. etc. Unfortunately, its the only game in
< town. ProfessionalDraw is the only structured drawing program for the
< Amiga that is not targetted at CAD work.
Again, I perceive a possible misconception. A structured drawing
program is not primarily intended for CASE work. I have produced many
flow charts, data flow diagrams, and various other flavors of diagrams
and charts with Professional Draw, but that is still not it's main
purpose. It is intended to produce structured DRAWINGS, including some
I have produced with close to 1500 individual objects on a single
page. That it can do what it does as a diagramming tool is a credit to
its authors. Many of my diagrams produced with Pro Draw have far
outshined the equivalent diagrams from any CASE tool I have yet tried.
Also, although I am not aware of any CASE tools for the Amiga, that
certainly doesn't mean there are none.
You say that you don't want to do desktop publishing, yet you list
features which are, for the most part, unique to the DTP world. For
what you want, I would recommend either Pagestream, Professional Page,
or AmigaTex (sp?). As far as a diagramming tool, I don't have enough
knowledge of the available products to make any suggestions, but I have
been more than pleased with the results I have seen from Pro Draw.
I would encourage you to take a longer look at the software available
for the Amiga. There are certainly some things which are better left
to the MS-DOS/Mac world, but I have yet to encounter one.
Regards,
Chris
--
Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | /|__|\__/|__|\
cseaman@gateway.sequent.com <or> | | | Where does he get
...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | | /\/\ /\/\ | those Wonderful toys?
The Home of the Killer Smiley | \| \/ |/cseaman@sequent.UUCP (Chris "The Bartman" Seaman) (03/06/91)
Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes:
< Also, the situations are not the same. ProWrite is underkill for what
< I need, and my letter suggests adding features. ProfessionalDraw is
< overkill. It gives me more power than I can use at the expense of
< simplicity and speed. My letter to Gold Disk will suggest creating
< a scaled-down version ('ProfDraw Jr.', or 'AmateurDraw', or some such),
< which would be a drawing package more like MacDraw or GEMDraw for the PC.
<
< Lee
Just as an aside, New Horizons has announced a product which may fill the
'Pro Draw Jr.' bill. I can't recall the name, but it claims to offer the
main power of structured drawing, without the overkill (or price). I
believe the suggested retail price is $125 (US).
Regards,
Chris
--
Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | /|__|\__/|__|\
cseaman@gateway.sequent.com <or> | | | Where does he get
...!uunet!sequent!cseaman | | /\/\ /\/\ | those Wonderful toys?
The Home of the Killer Smiley | \| \/ |/Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com (03/06/91)
>In article <39850@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: > >>ProfessionalDraw is overkill. It gives me more power than I can use at the >>expense of simplicity and speed. > >I recommend making sure you use Version 2 of ProDraw. It's much faster >than the original in many areas, especially text. This kind of program is >really designed for doing illustrations and things, not simple box and line >figures. I have used it extensively in my Zorro III bus documentation, and >I'm pretty satisfied with the way it handles technical drawing. I haven't >used it for any more free-flowing stuff. Of course, I also have a fast >system. I have a 25Mz A3000, and I am using version 2. Lines, curves, polygons all display fast enough, but text is terribly slow. Data flow diagrams have a lot of text. The structured drawing program GemDraw is much faster on a mere PC/AT. It gets its speed from having less options (e.g., text only comes in certain sizes, you can only rotate it at 90 degree angles, you can't strech, bend, curve, warp, spindle, or mutilate it.) Depending on your needs, this is either good or bad. Also, under AmigaDos 2.0, my copy of ProDraw 2 locks up any time I try add text. (This doesn't happen if I boot under 1.3) >>My letter to Gold Disk will suggest creating a scaled-down version >>('ProfDraw Jr.', or 'AmateurDraw', or some such), which would be a drawing >>package more like MacDraw or GEMDraw for the PC. >You might just ring a bell with that approach. Gold Disk does still >support PageSetter, which at this point amounts to a scaled down version >of ProPage. You might also check out ProVector, which is another vector >drawing (as opposed to CAD) program out for the Amiga, and the first to >support the IFF structured drawing form, DR2D. I haven't tried it myself >yet, but it looks very nice and I would be willing to switch over if I like >it that much better. Haven't heard of ProVector. I'll look for it. (It's not listed in the latest issue of AmigaWorld, where I did my software shopping.) >However, complaining about a tool being too powerful is rarely a valid >point when you claim to come from a business prespective. A business will >rarely make such complaints, and if the tool runs too slow, they'll buy a >faster system. Witness the success of Ventura Publisher and AutoCAD on the >PC. Both are slow as snails and full of features. But a business will pay >for a fast '386 or '486 in order to use them productively. a) I own the fastest Amiga you guys make, for chrissakes. b) I disagree with your statement. A business will buy a superfast PC if they NEED the power of Ventura Publisher or AutoCAD. Businesses won't buy VP if they just need to do simple memos, or AutoCAD to do clipart. They can do those things on lesser machines with simpler (and faster) software. I didn't have that option for ProDraw. (Or at least I was unaware of another option, e.g., ProVector) > You would want >something less on your C= Colt at home. Now, both of these are more mature >products than ProDraw, so they have pretty much eliminated "slowness for >no good reason", something Gold Disk could spend just a little more time >on. >As for real document processing, while I have done a nearly 100 page >document in ProPage, I did it there mainly because of the graphics I >needed. For any mainly textual work, especially something on the order of >500-1000 pages, no wordprocessor of any kind is going to compare to TeX. >It's not WYSIWYG (though the Amiga previewer might make you forget much of >this), but it was designed for typesetting large documents and is >inherently faster to work with than any WYSIWYG wordprocessor, or even >partially markup wordprocessors like WordPerfect on the Amiga. Someone else suggested AmigaTex, too. I'll have to look into it. I'm familiar with Scribe, so if its something like that, then I can live with it. But I hope the rumors of MicroSoft porting Word are true. Thanks for your comments. Lee
swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) (03/07/91)
In article <39832@cup.portal.com> Doug_B_Erdely@cup.portal.com writes: >SO? What does this have to do with Commodore? Try writing the software >companies that write this trash! Let THEM know what you think of THEIR >software! > > - Doug - > >Doug_B_Erdely@Cup.Portal.Com Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the machine motivated them to do so perhaps? If Commodore wants to rise above the image of a game machine, it will have to take an ACTIVE part in doing so, and I don't mean just making a nice machine. I mean MOTIVATING the vendors to port their stuff to the Amiga platform, like Jobs did... Sorry Doug, I think it has a LOT to do with Commodore. After all, THEY are responsible for the success of their machine, not us. The machine will survive not because we jump up and down and tell everyone how wonderful it is (which I DO a fair bit of), but because it fulfills a need, and it takes software to do that. For Example: a few of years ago we needed to get the documentation department running a nice desktop publishing package. Interleaf was chosen to meet our needs. We were going to put it on Suns (3/60s at the time, about 25K each). When we found out Interleaf would run on a $8k Mac II we bought the Macs instead with no loss in functionality, and no real loss in performance for this application. Our needs were fulfilled, and with a much smaller financial burden. If the solution was not available on the Macs, we would not have purchased them. If someone needs Lotus, they will not buy an Amiga. If someone needs AutoCAD, they will not buy an Amiga. If someone needs DBASEIII, they will not buy an Amiga. If someone needs ORACLE, they will not buy an Amiga. etc etc etc. REGARDLESS of how much they like the machine. Being a System Administrator, I strongly influence computer purchases I have never suggested an Ami, because they have not had any solutions to meet our needs...and that is most unfortunate for Commodore, and for us Amiga users in general. Regards, Scott
cug@Antares.Concordia.CA ( COMPUTER USERS GROUP) (03/07/91)
In article <39887@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: >I have a 25Mz A3000, and I am using version 2. Lines, curves, polygons all >display fast enough, but text is terribly slow. Data flow diagrams have a >lot of text. > Uhum... You are using the wrong tools my friend. Pdraw is a graphic artist's tool, it's not for doing DFDs. You should put your "lots of text" into the boxes (outlined OC) in ProPage 2.0 or Pagestream 2.1 or Saxon Publisher 1.1. Each has primititves for adding the little polygon-critters that you want. >Also, under AmigaDos 2.0, my copy of ProDraw 2 locks up any time I try >add text. (This doesn't happen if I boot under 1.3) I got no problems with it. Check, Version of Kickstart, software, corruption of files etc... > >Haven't heard of ProVector. I'll look for it. (It's not listed in the >latest issue of AmigaWorld, where I did my software shopping.) Yes! This is the one you need. It's great. >a) I own the fastest Amiga you guys make, for chrissakes. I usually smile when I tell people that. Sounds like you're having a bad week. Try using Imagine or Dpaint, it'll cheer you up... >Lee Stefy
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Adam Hill) (03/07/91)
In article <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com> swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: >Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software >vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the >machine motivated them to do so perhaps? If your mad now you will be FLAMING in a bit.... In the newest BYTE (April) there is a "Whats New" on Word Perfect 5.1 for the *NEXT*!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't know about the rest of you but this BITES MY BUM quite a bit. >take an ACTIVE part in doing so, and I don't mean just making a nice machine. >I mean MOTIVATING the vendors to port their stuff to the Amiga platform, like >Jobs did... Amen. >Sorry Doug, I think it has a LOT to do with Commodore. After all, THEY are >responsible for the success of their machine, not us. The machine will >survive not because we jump up and down and tell everyone how wonderful it is >(which I DO a fair bit of), but because it fulfills a need, and it takes >software to do that. You know there is one thing I wondered about while the Toaster was VaporWARE?? How did NewTek survive? How did they get the huge mkting budget that they have and how did they pay for custom ASIC development? Did CBM support them or what? -- adam hill -- hill@evax.uta.edu I programmed for three days Make Up Your Own Mind.. AMIGA! And heard no human voices. Amiga... Multimedia NOW! But the hard disk sang. - TZoP Born To Run SVR4
ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) (03/08/91)
In article <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com>, swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: [stuff deleted] > Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software > vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the > machine motivated them to do so perhaps? > > If Commodore wants to rise above the image of a game machine, it will have to > take an ACTIVE part in doing so, and I don't mean just making a nice machine. > I mean MOTIVATING the vendors to port their stuff to the Amiga platform, like ^^^^^^^^^^ This typically means mucho money. Does C-A have (literaly) millions of dollars to pay WordPerfect, Lotus, Ashton-Tate etc ? > Jobs did... [more stuff deleted] > Regards, > Scott ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andy Nagy (ptoper@asterix.gaul.csd.uwo.ca) The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada "Dee do do do, dee da da da, thats all I want to say to you" -- The Police
griff@anvil.intel.com (Richard Griffith) (03/08/91)
In article <2440@ria.ccs.uwo.ca>, ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) writes: > From: ptoper@obelix (Andy Nagy) > Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy > Subject: Re: Still no Ami businessware. > > In article <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com>, swm@acd4.acd.com ( > Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: > [stuff deleted] > > Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software > > vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the > > machine motivated them to do so perhaps? > > > > If Commodore wants to rise above the image of a game machine, it will have to > > take an ACTIVE part in doing so, and I don't mean just making a nice machine. > > I mean MOTIVATING the vendors to port their stuff to the Amiga platform, like > ^^^^^^^^^^ > > This typically means mucho money. Does C-A have (literaly) millions of > dollars to pay WordPerfect, Lotus, Ashton-Tate etc ? Can they afford *not* to? With data compatability, data sharing, and a little cooperation between vendors (read: CBM should write the specs to require it...) WP, 123, and dBase could freely swap data back and forth *while running at the same time*. (ARexx and/or Clipboard....) > > > Jobs did... > [more stuff deleted] > > Regards, > > Scott > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Andy Nagy (ptoper@asterix.gaul.csd.uwo.ca) > The University of Western Ontario, London, Canada > "Dee do do do, dee da da da, thats all I want to say to you" -- The Police :Richard E. Griffith, "griff" : iNTEL, Hillsboro Ore. :griff@anvil.hf.intel.com :SCA!: Cyrus Hammerhand, Household of the Golden Wolf, Dragons' Mist, An Tir :These are MY opinions, if iNTEL wanted them, They'd pay for `em!
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/09/91)
In article <39887@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: >>In article <39850@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: >>I recommend making sure you use Version 2 of ProDraw. It's much faster >>than the original in many areas, especially text. >The structured drawing program GemDraw is much faster on a mere PC/AT. >It gets its speed from having less options (e.g., text only comes in >certain sizes, you can only rotate it at 90 degree angles, you can't >strech, bend, curve, warp, spindle, or mutilate it.) Depending on your >needs, this is either good or bad. For any real professional work, I don't think you can possibly live with something like that. In my work with technical illustrations, I need fonts that are scaleable within at least a point of being perfect. That will _require_ vector fonts, even though a program could kludge it and go faster with bitmapped fonts, if it chooses to limit the sizes. >Haven't heard of ProVector. I'll look for it. (It's not listed in the >latest issue of AmigaWorld, where I did my software shopping.) It has been advertised recently; perhaps in Amazing rather than AmigaWorld, I'm not sure. I am very interested in trying it myself. >>However, complaining about a tool being too powerful is rarely a valid >>point when you claim to come from a business prespective. A business will >>rarely make such complaints, and if the tool runs too slow, they'll buy a >>faster system. >b) I disagree with your statement. A business will buy a superfast PC if >they NEED the power of Ventura Publisher or AutoCAD. Businesses won't buy >VP if they just need to do simple memos, Of course not, they'll use WordPerfect or something. You can too, but you're not writing simple memos, you're interesting in doing things that are pretty much only handled by high end system. >Someone else suggested AmigaTex, too. I'll have to look into it. I'm >familiar with Scribe, so if its something like that, then I can live >with it. But I hope the rumors of MicroSoft porting Word are true. Microsoft Word would be at least a partial step above most Amiga wordprocessors, and a step below any DTP program, in terms of layout power if not features. I used Scribe extensively in school, and have yet to find a wordprocessor that even comes close to its power. TeX, on the other hand, is more powerful and nearly as easy to lean as Scribe. Both are intended for writing large documents. Many people say the Amiga has the best TeX implementation going, and although I have only played with it, I have no reason to disbelieve this assertion. -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "What works for me might work for you" -Jimmy Buffett
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/09/91)
In article <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com> swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: >In article <39832@cup.portal.com> Doug_B_Erdely@cup.portal.com writes: >>SO? What does this have to do with Commodore? Try writing the software >>companies that write this trash! Let THEM know what you think of THEIR >>software! >Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software >vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the >machine motivated them to do so perhaps? Yes they did. With money. Geeters. Green. Scratch. Moula. If you have a couple of million in pocket, Lotus would be more than happy to build you a port of 1-2-3, or the new spreadsheet on the NeXT. No problem. No argument. >I mean MOTIVATING the vendors to port their stuff to the Amiga platform, like >Jobs did... You just have to realize what MOTIVATION means to the large companies. It does not mean a direct line to the developer support group, or loaner system, or anything else Commodore would be more than willing to supply. It means BIG BUCKS, and nothing else. I'm not really sure going after #1 in the PC market for any particular product is a good thing, anyway. Sure, it makes for good press. But in most case, the #1 product is rather weak when compared to #'s 2..N. Even Microsoft makes a better spreadsheet for the PC than Lotus, they just aren't the established one. Once a market reaches full maturity, standards tend to cause stagnation, and the "best" only rarely does a big business against the "established". >Sorry Doug, I think it has a LOT to do with Commodore. After all, THEY are >responsible for the success of their machine, not us. "The Amiga", like any other computer system, is a complete environment. As in all environments, every member of that environment is responsible for the success of the environment as a whole. Commodore can certainly do its part, but it is no magician. It cannot perform miracles, anymore than Delaware can decide on its own to solve the problems that currently exist in the ecopolitical environment we call the USA. Commodore and Amiga together created this Amiga environment, but it is hardly all powerful, certainly not the sole participant. -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "What works for me might work for you" -Jimmy Buffett
Classic_-_Concepts@cup.portal.com (03/09/91)
Since we're on the topic of business software, we might as well discuss
database-ware.
After reading reviews, we selected Pro Data Retrieve (about a year and a
half ago, I believe). We have an expert data base programmer in-house
who does consulting work in the community, installing and customizing
data base software.
He's an Amiga owner/lover.
He tried setting up Pro Data Retrieve for our needs on the 2000. He spent
almost a week and MANY tech support calls. I looked at it too, to see if
his complaints were valid and concluded that they were. There are problems
in the programming language which comes with it that can't be overcome, like
sensing if a box has been clicked inside or outside the critical area (there'
no way to test the value, so what good is it). He took considerable time
to write a thoughtful, long letter to the manufacturer to which he received
no response. Time was a-wasting and he finally gave up and created a very
good data base on the IBM/compat. in less than 2 days in SEVERAL sets of
software. He has about 3 data base programs due to his line of work. I
watched the entire process. In summary, he set up a good, bug-free workable
system on the IBM-compat. in about 16 hours. He was unable to put together
anything at the moderately sophisticated level we needed in over 50 hours
with the Amiga software. The others tried their hands at it and gave up.
Sure, you can set up the records very easily, but writing the bug routines
and interactivity sections was a hopeless endeavor. We haven't heard any
word of upgrades or fixes for these problems. Too bad. The software is
'almost there'. It has a lot of things to recommend it.
We were almost set to get Superbase (is that the name of the other major
program?) but our almost-local Amiga dealer and wizard-developer-Amiga-
fanatic said he had tried with that and given up (for his business). He
finally bought an IBM-compatible laptop and set it up on that.
It is frustrating in the *extreme* to go out an buy a whole other computer
system and software when we love the Amiga and just want to spend the money
on a good piece of software ($1500 vs $350 is an awfully big difference).
If we good accomplish our needs on the Amigas, we'd chuck the IBM compatible
in a minute. It's taking up a lot of space. It's kind of ugly too.
Manufacturers may be ignoring the Amiga as a business market, but there are
lots of us who would buy good desktop publishing software (better than what
we have now) and good data base/spreadsheet software at the drop of a hat.
J. Petersenrodent@netcom.COM (Ben Discoe) (03/09/91)
swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: >In article <39832@cup.portal.com> Doug_B_Erdely@cup.portal.com writes: >>Try writing the software >>companies that write this trash! Let THEM know what you think of THEIR >>software! >Sorry Doug, I think it has a LOT to do with Commodore. After all, THEY are >responsible for the success of their machine, not us. The machine will >survive not because we jump up and down and tell everyone how wonderful it is >(which I DO a fair bit of), but because it fulfills a need, and it takes >software to do that. For Example: >If someone needs Lotus, they will not buy an Amiga. >If someone needs AutoCAD, they will not buy an Amiga. >If someone needs DBASEIII, they will not buy an Amiga. Wait a darn minute! If someone needs DBASEIII, they darn well SHOULD buy an Amiga. Allow me to mention dBManV, which is a DBASE3 clone with enough extentions, improvements etc. to satisfy any IBM-world database type. Runs great under 2.0 too. And about 5 different mail-order ads in AmigaWorld list it for Very Inexpensive. >If someone needs ORACLE, they will not buy an Amiga. > etc >REGARDLESS of how much they like the machine. >Being a System Administrator, I strongly influence computer purchases >I have never suggested an Ami, because they have not had any solutions >to meet our needs...and that is most unfortunate for Commodore, and for >us Amiga users in general. Please excuse the fact that I am connected to VersaSoft (makers of dBMan) as their main programmer (and old-time Amiga fanatic). On the original subject, Commodore is indeed trying harder to encourage development - the 3000 I'm typing this on at work is evidence. --------------- Ben, in San Jose, the cruddy L.A. of northern California.
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/10/91)
In article <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: > I'm not really sure going after #1 in the PC market for any particular product > is a good thing, anyway. Sure, it makes for good press. But in most case, > the #1 product is rather weak when compared to #'s 2..N. So go for one of #2..N. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) (03/11/91)
J. Petersen writes: >It is frustrating in the *extreme* to go out an buy a whole other computer >system and software when we love the Amiga and just want to spend the money >on a good piece of software ($1500 vs $350 is an awfully big difference). >If we good accomplish our needs on the Amigas, we'd chuck the IBM compatible [Lots of stuff deleted above] I agree completely. I run a multi-line BBS and have one simple requirement. I need a Database that will keep track of users both current and expired, I need to compare names/phone numbers of new applications against old, and someplace to keep notes for each user (uploads and the like). The programmer of the BBS software plans to add these features (and more) to the BBS itself, but that won't be for quite a while yet. What we REALLY need is DBASEIII/VI. I know many people hate it with a passion but it has a ready made pool of professional programmers, loads and loads of third party books and courses, everything we need for a 'big splash' or powerful database software. In the meantime if someone knows any Amiga database software that can read DBase files, PLEASE let me know. I'm starting this project of mine in 'Maximizer' on an IBM compatible and would like to keep the data at home on my Ami as well. --------------------------------------- | patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca | | 'The Outbound' BBS Vancouver BC | ---------------------------------------
sss10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Napalm) (03/11/91)
Amigavision creates Dbase <.dbf> compatible files so I would assume it can read them as well. However does someone have any good experience with it using it as a database? The manual didnt help me too much and Im a little afraid of using for a database. dont know why i just am .
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/11/91)
In article <patrick_meloy.1509@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca> patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) writes: >J. Petersen writes: >>It is frustrating in the *extreme* to go out an buy a whole other computer >>system and software when we love the Amiga and just want to spend the money >>on a good piece of software ($1500 vs $350 is an awfully big difference). >>If we good accomplish our needs on the Amigas, we'd chuck the IBM compatible > >[Lots of stuff deleted above] > >What we REALLY need is DBASEIII/VI. I know many people hate it with a passion >but it has a ready made pool of professional programmers, loads and loads of >third party books and courses, everything we need for a 'big splash' or >powerful database software. > I don't know what everyone keeps complaining about, at least in regards to databases. If you need the 'industry standard' dBASE, get dbMAN V. It is a dBASE III+ clone with lots of extensions, and will read dBASE files. And, convenience of conveniences, AmigaVision is designed to work with dBASE files. -- Ethan Upon leaving office, Ronald Reagan began renting an office in the penthouse of the Fox Plaza, the Los Angeles high-rise used as the location for the terrorist movie "Die Hard".
rodent@netcom.COM (Ben Discoe) (03/12/91)
patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) writes: >What we REALLY need is DBASEIII/VI. I know many people hate it with a passion >but it has a ready made pool of professional programmers, loads and loads of >third party books and courses, everything we need for a 'big splash' or >powerful database software. >In the meantime if someone knows any Amiga database software that can read >DBase files, PLEASE let me know. I'm starting this project of mine in >'Maximizer' on an IBM compatible and would like to keep the data at home on >my Ami as well. Once again, allow me to mention dBMan 5, a dBaseIII clone with enough extra features to compete with dBaseIV, Clipper, etc. dBMan has been available for 5 years on the Amiga! The current version, 5.3, runs under AmigaOS2.0 and allows all kinds of color/resolution options. No, the user interface isn't quite Amigatized, but it's better than dBaseIII and most other stuff people use in the MSDOS world. And there's a friendly Amiga fanatic on tech support: myself. dBMan is cheap, too - check your favorite mail order ad. ... please excuse my obvious bias as support and main programmer for VersaSoft, but I've been an Amiga user for 6 years and I know that this sort of software is exactly what the Amiga could use some more of. ------------------------------ Ben in San Jose, a horrible place to live, but hey, gotta pay those bills..
peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) (03/14/91)
In article <patrick_meloy.1509@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca> patrick_meloy@outbound.wimsey.bc.ca (Patrick Meloy) writes: > >I agree completely. I run a multi-line BBS and have one simple requirement. I >need a Database that will keep track of users both current and expired, I >need to compare names/phone numbers of new applications against old, and >someplace to keep notes for each user (uploads and the like). > >What we REALLY need is DBASEIII/VI. I know many people hate it with a passion >but it has a ready made pool of professional programmers, loads and loads of >third party books and courses, everything we need for a 'big splash' or >powerful database software. Have you already tried that dBman software mentioned in another posting here? If you only need dbase file compatibility, then perhaps also Superbase might serve you. And what about those database routine packages/libraries that are offered by SAS, for the Amiga? -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (03/16/91)
In article <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >In article <1991Mar6.201318.11662@acd4.acd.com> swm@acd4.acd.com ( Scott W. Manzi (ICTT)) writes: >>Gee, why does NeXT with a trivial installed base have MAJOR software >>vendors porting code to that machine? because the COMPANY behind the >>machine motivated them to do so perhaps? > >Yes they did. With money. Geeters. Green. Scratch. Moula. > >If you have a couple of million in pocket, Lotus would be more than happy >to build you a port of 1-2-3, or the new spreadsheet on the NeXT. No problem. >No argument. Fine, then it is Commodore's *responsiblity* to do just that. No problem. No argument. >>Sorry Doug, I think it has a LOT to do with Commodore. After all, THEY are >>responsible for the success of their machine, not us. > >"The Amiga", like any other computer system, is a complete environment. As >in all environments, every member of that environment is responsible for the >success of the environment as a whole. Commodore can certainly do its part, >but it is no magician. Sure, but Commodore is *not* performing its half of the dance. WE can't blame the engineers, they seem to be working very hard -- and if they had twice as many, they might actually be able to get all the things they want to get done, done in a reasonable amount of time. That cannot be *our* responsiblity though, can it? Neither can the lack of financial commitment. If Commodore *really* wants this machine to succeed, they take that 28million they earned last year (or whatever), and they spend it in exactly the fashion you describe. That is assuming they want it to be a mainstream business machine. Maybe all of us don't want it. I *do*, for the simple reason that I want to use a good word processor for resume' work, take it to the local CopyMat and get a laser printed version. I might even balance my checkbook (a task I refuse to do by hand), if there was a simple program that allowed a nifty way of doing that. Te fact of the matter is is that shareware is great -- but salable software is usable, and can market a machine -- something even developers can perk up to. >It cannot perform miracles, anymore than Delaware can >decide on its own to solve the problems that currently exist in the >ecopolitical environment we call the USA. Flawed argument -- the USA is a democracy, Commodore is not. Look, I agree with bunches of what you have to say, but the implication that Cmdre is overstrapped does not match with reality. In reality Commodore can afford to pay developers to develop software, and they can afford to hire more programmers/engineers -- that they refuse (seemingly) to do either is the source of frustration. I see improvements on the horizon, I just wish they'd hurry up and come my way. I do *NOT* want to program on either the Mac *or* the IBM for a living, and I am no graphic artist -- so what am I to do? David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu Signature erased, because it used to be something snide against the Mac. undergoing recnstrctn. [Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus]
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/16/91)
In article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: > >Sure, but Commodore is *not* performing its half of the dance. WE can't >blame the engineers, they seem to be working very hard -- and if they had >twice as many, they might actually be able to get all the things they want to >get done, done in a reasonable amount of time. That cannot be *our* >responsiblity though, can it? > >Neither can the lack of financial commitment. If Commodore *really* wants >this machine to succeed, they take that 28million they earned last year >(or whatever), and they spend it in exactly the fashion you describe. That is Commodore doesn't issue dividends to stock holders, so that $28 million will be spent, have no doubt. It doesn't just disappear. It might not be spent on everything you want, but it will go to use. And, just because Commodore doesn't discuss their dealings with Lotus and Microsoft on the net doesn't mean they don't have dealings. -- Ethan A tourist in New York City was overheard asking a New Yorker, "Excuse me, can you tell me how to get to the statue of liberty, or should I go f*ck myself?"
consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Marcus Cannava) (03/17/91)
In article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) writes: |>In article <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: |>> |>>"The Amiga", like any other computer system, is a complete environment. As |>>in all environments, every member of that environment is responsible for the |>>success of the environment as a whole. Commodore can certainly do its part, |>>but it is no magician. |> "The Amiga" is a product that makes a company money. Let's not lose sight of Commodore's main interest: Turning a profit. Commodore is not in this business for fun, nor to enrich people's lives, they are in it to make dollars. Now, let's see.. Commodore is actually expecting the customers to do "their part" in assisting them in making money? Isn't it in Commodore's best interest to advertise, and promote the Amiga, to achieve their goal? I don't know, but I don't see where it's my "responsibility" to do anything at all to help the machine succeed. I may *desire* the machine to succeed (which I do), but I don't have the funds, resources, time, or the interest, simply because the end result is just giving more money to Commodore. If I do the selling, I expect the money and the profit. Commodore, if you sell the machine, then you deserve your money. But don't tell me it's MY responsibility to sell YOUR machine, and watch YOU get the money for it. It's not "Commodore does its part, now you customers do your part"; this is Commodore's ballgame completely. - Their machine, - Their profit, but most of all, - THEIR work in promoting it. And gee, Commodore, maybe if you actually did more than "your half", you'd find your customers a little more eager to scream out "I'm an Amiga owner, you should be, too!" "The Amiga" is not a cult. It's a machine. The customer's "responsibility" to it ends after he signs the check. I love the Amiga. I want it to succeed. But I feel that Commodore must wake up and take ALL the responsibility in promoting it and supporting it, and stop relying on and exploiting the "word-of-mouth" customer network, which is the ONLY thing that has made the Amiga survive from the A1000 models years ago. \marc ------ consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu Marcus N. Cannava @bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu SUNY-Binghamton ---------------------------------- Student Consultant 'I do not fear computers.. I fear the lack of them' -- I. Asimov RNM
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/17/91)
In article <1991Mar16.210142.11636@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (Marcus Cannava) writes: >|>In article <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com >(Dave Haynie) writes: >|>> >|>>"The Amiga", like any other computer system, is a complete environment. As >|>>in all environments, every member of that environment is responsible for the >|>>success of the environment as a whole. Commodore can certainly do its part, >|>>but it is no magician. >|> > >"The Amiga" is a product that makes a company money. Let's not lose >sight of Commodore's main interest: Turning a profit. Commodore is not >in this business for fun, nor to enrich people's lives, they are in it >to make dollars. > >Now, let's see.. Commodore is actually expecting the customers to do >"their part" in assisting them in making money? Isn't it in Commodore's >best interest to advertise, and promote the Amiga, to achieve their goal? > >I don't know, but I don't see where it's my "responsibility" to do >anything at all to help the machine succeed. I may *desire* the machine >to succeed (which I do), but I don't have the funds, resources, time, or >the interest, simply because the end result is just giving more money to >Commodore. > Why are you getting an attitude? Dave only stated simple facts. Commodore is not the only factor in the Amiga's success. This is absolutely true. Commodore can't control every factor in the Amiga's success, they can merely try to influence them. There is no simple rule that you spend x dollars and get y sales. Nowhere were YOU told to do anything. Merely that what you do do affects the Amiga's success. >Commodore, if you sell the machine, then you deserve your money. But >don't tell me it's MY responsibility to sell YOUR machine, and watch YOU >get the money for it. You're absolutely right. Thank God they haven't. > >It's not "Commodore does its part, now you customers do your part"; this >is Commodore's ballgame completely. > > - Their machine, > - Their profit, > > but most of all, > > - THEIR work in promoting it. > >And gee, Commodore, maybe if you actually did more than "your half", >you'd find your customers a little more eager to scream out "I'm an >Amiga owner, you should be, too!" > >"The Amiga" is not a cult. It's a machine. The customer's >"responsibility" to it ends after he signs the check. > As to the Amiga being a cult machine, many people here think of it that way. I put myself somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. But there are dealers, developers and buyers, all of which are beyond Commodore's control, but within their influence. They are all also within the influence of all the other computer makers. CBM-bashing is just silly. For the very reason that they are in business to make money they will do their best to make the most they can. >I love the Amiga. I want it to succeed. But I feel that Commodore must >wake up and take ALL the responsibility in promoting it and supporting >it, and stop relying on and exploiting the "word-of-mouth" customer >network, which is the ONLY thing that has made the Amiga survive from >the A1000 models years ago. > When is the last time Commodore USA turned a profit? When you get the answer to that let me know. > \marc > >------ >consp13@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu Marcus N. Cannava > @bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu SUNY-Binghamton >---------------------------------- Student Consultant >'I do not fear computers.. > I fear the lack of them' -- I. Asimov RNM -- Ethan A tourist in New York City was overheard asking a New Yorker, "Excuse me, can you tell me how to get to the statue of liberty, or should I go f*ck myself?"
elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green) (03/17/91)
From article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, by navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas): > Look, I agree with bunches of what you have to say, but the implication that > Cmdre is overstrapped does not match with reality. In reality Commodore can > afford to pay developers to develop software, and they can afford to hire more > programmers/engineers -- that they refuse (seemingly) to do either is the > source of frustration. I wonder where you get your perception about Commodore not hiring programmers/engineers? They've been hiring programmers/engineers in a steady stream for the last two and a half years, and are STILL looking for people to fill a few slots (see their ads in EE Times). As for paying developers to develop software, I can't say anything -- I'm under nondisclosure -- but Commodore hasn't remained totally out of that either. Just because they haven't paid Lotus $40 million dollars to build an Amiga version of 1-2-3 doesn't mean that Commodore is standing still... all it means is that Commodore can't easily justify paying Lotus the kind of money that it'd take to port 1-2-3 to the Amiga, when there are other aspects of the machine that need the cash far more (e.g., hiring more engineers to work on AmigaDOS 2.x). == Eric Lee Green (318) 984-1820 P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509 elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM uunet!mjbtn!raider!elgamy!elg
vsolanoy@ozonebbs.UUCP (Victor Solanoy) (03/19/91)
> > I don't know, but I don't see where it's my "responsibility" to do > anything at all to help the machine succeed. I may *desire* the machine > to succeed (which I do), but I don't have the funds, resources, time, or > the interest, simply because the end result is just giving more money to > Commodore. > > If I do the selling, I expect the money and the profit. > > Commodore, if you sell the machine, then you deserve your money. But > don't tell me it's MY responsibility to sell YOUR machine, and watch YOU > get the money for it. > > It's not "Commodore does its part, now you customers do your part"; this > is Commodore's ballgame completely. > > - Their machine, > - Their profit, > > but most of all, > > - THEIR work in promoting it. > > And gee, Commodore, maybe if you actually did more than "your half", > you'd find your customers a little more eager to scream out "I'm an > Amiga owner, you should be, too!" > > "The Amiga" is not a cult. It's a machine. The customer's > "responsibility" to it ends after he signs the check. > > I love the Amiga. I want it to succeed. But I feel that Commodore must > wake up and take ALL the responsibility in promoting it and supporting > it, and stop relying on and exploiting the "word-of-mouth" customer > network, which is the ONLY thing that has made the Amiga survive from > the A1000 models years ago. > > \marc > I know that the message quote is a bit long, but I remember that Forbes did an article on Commodore and the Amiga (might not have been Forbes.. but some other respectable reader), but the article mentioned something about what Marc mentioned.... just wanted to let Marc know he's not alone in his feelings... because I personally feel the same way. I know Commodore doesn't have the big financial backing of Apple Computer or NeXT, but a decent attempt would be nice.... Stevie Amiga really doesn't cut it. Victor
daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) (03/19/91)
In article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >In article <19656@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >Sure, but Commodore is *not* performing its half of the dance. WE can't >blame the engineers, they seem to be working very hard -- and if they had >twice as many, they might actually be able to get all the things they want to >get done, done in a reasonable amount of time. No, actually, that would just double the number of things we want to get done, and the timeframes would remain the same. >That cannot be *our* responsiblity though, can it? Everyone should live up to their level of responsibility, of course. C= is absolutely responsible for developing the system hardware and OS, and does what it can to deliver add-in boards that it considers reasonable and tries to evalangize the system, convincing companies to port their software. That doesn't mean that C= has $10 million tucked away for every 3rd party software package out there. 3rd parties certainly do have their responsibilities. They should do their part to create useful programs that obey C='s programming rules and go through a reasonable test before shipping. Doing it right will help these guys out, doing it wrong will harm the entire Amiga community. Users have the responsibility to buy programs rather than stealing them, and prehaps to seek intelligent solutions to their problems rather than wontonly bandmouthing the system for no good reason. This is the same for all systems. However, in the PC "environment", no single member can completely change the market on their own; even IBM and Microsoft will find someone else doing it better if they don't keep up. And no amount of yelling on the part of users is going to have a significant bad impact. The Mac market isn't as permanent as the PC clone market, but it's pretty solid. Even the overpriced Macs haven't been a significant problem until recently. The Amiga market, especially in the US, is much more fragile. It's also, in many respects, much more alive. >>It cannot perform miracles, anymore than Delaware can >>decide on its own to solve the problems that currently exist in the >>ecopolitical environment we call the USA. >Flawed argument -- the USA is a democracy, Commodore is not. Commodore does not have absolute, arbitrary control of the Amiga market, either. No member of any active environment is all-powerful. Commodore certainly has the greatest influence of any member of the Amiga market, but that alone can't solve every problem overnight, nor can it convince developers on other platforms to come over in droves. >David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy "What works for me might work for you" -Jimmy Buffett
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar15.220940.22327@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > Commodore doesn't issue dividends to stock holders, so >that $28 million will be spent, have no doubt. It doesn't just >disappear. It might not be spent on everything you want, but it >will go to use. And, just because Commodore doesn't discuss their >dealings with Lotus and Microsoft on the net doesn't mean they >don't have dealings. > > -- Ethan Very true. However, I have *no* interest whatsoever what Cmdre is doing. I am not affiliated with Cmdre in any way, except as a registered developer. What I *care* about are the results. Here is the upshot: 1) Microsoft is developing a lot of decent software for Apple. 2) Lotus has developed an interesting package for Next. 3) Neither has done anything visible for the Amiga. [Except, maybe, AmigaBasic, gee, great :) ] I don't care what Cmdre is doing, they are clearly not doing *enough*. As an interested party, that really is all we should compare, no? I can't believe that Steve Jobs paid more than $28million to Lotus, why haven't we seen similar results, then? Clearly Cmdre has a bigger business market than the Next. Heck, it's kind of a cheap shot to even compare the two -- what Nexts are selling, are going to schools, where it is not clear that business sftwre is likely to be used, or needed. They seem to have the resources, they have the operating system, they have what is apparently a sufficient market for some companies, so what's the holdup? All bitterness is directed against Cmdre, not Ethan, of course :) :) >A tourist in New York City was overheard asking a New Yorker, Hey, hey, I'm from NY -- we never said no such thing. Of course, then, I never lived in the city :) David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu Signature erased, because it used to be something snide against the Mac. undergoing recnstrctn. [Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus]
1013734@hydra.maths.unsw.OZ.AU (03/20/91)
In article <39774@cup.portal.com> Lee_Robert_Willis@cup.portal.com writes: >This is a copy of a letter I have just sent to CBM. (Let the FLAMES >begin!) > [....] > >ProWrite does not handle footnotes, endnotes, paragraph numbering, >multiple columns, or structured drawings. All of these features are >necessary for professional work. Plus, its print quality is horrid >(as you can see). > >So I started checking into the other Amiga word processors. There >aren't any that fulfill the above requirements! WordPerfect comes >closest, since the only feature it lacks is graphic and multiple font >support. (WordPerfect 5 has this, but is not available for the >Amiga.) Unfortunately, WordPerfect has a poor user interface. > >This is pathetic. These features have been available for years on PC >and Macintosh platforms. I can create a more professional looking >document on an ancient PC XT using Lotus Manuscript than I can on my >25 Megahertz, 68030 powered A3000. Well, it just sounds like you didn't look at the right kind f software for your Amiga. I would highly recommend a package know as TeX. It is not a word processor - it is much better than that. TeX is a typesetting language. It was written by Donald E. Knuth and up until recently it was running exclusively on larger computers (read mainframes and minicomputers) but with such a fantastic machine as the Amiga, you to can have it at home. The Amiga has the best implementation of TeX I have ever seen. It even beats the version we have on our network of about 250 Apollo workstations here at the uni. If you would like to see what the output of the program looks like go to a decent bookshop or library and have a look at: The TeXbook by Donald E. Knuth It is the manual for TeX itself. The TeXbook was done with the program which it describes. It is not as easy to use as a wordprocessor, but it isn't difficult either. The amount of power you have and the quality of output is unparelleled by any wordprocessor you will ever see. I have started using TeX about 6 months ago and deleted all of my wordprocessors since. I have no use for them. TeX rules. I hope that this information will get you out of your tight spot and please look more carefuly next time before flaming CBM. Peter Urbanec P.S. - There are two public domain versions of TeX and one commercial version that I know about. Try FTP'ing it from ab20.
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (03/21/91)
In article <00669169208@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM> elg@elgamy.RAIDERNET.COM (Eric Lee Green) writes: >I wonder where you get your perception about Commodore not hiring >programmers/engineers? Perhaps I overstated my point :) I merely meant to say that Cmdre does not have sufficient resources to meet *our* demands. I seem to recall Peter Cherna defending the situation vis-a-vis GadTools -- the fact that a lot more programming needed to have been done shows the situation to me. Sure, they *are* hiring -- that's good, but like I said you have to look at the results. At least, that's what I'm doing here. >As for paying >developers to develop software, I can't say anything -- I'm under >nondisclosure -- but Commodore hasn't remained totally out of that either. Off line and to e-mail. I'm under non-disclosure as well. :) I believe I wrapped up somewhere saying that the situatuation seems to be improving, just wish they'd get on with it. :) >Just because they haven't paid Lotus $40 million dollars to build an Amiga >version of 1-2-3 doesn't mean that Commodore is standing still... all it True. But there's an insidious cause-and-effect problem. *If* quality professional software is written for the Amiga, then it becomes a valid machine to buy for a wider market, meaning Cmdre makes more money, so they can "finance" more professional software. But there are a few cliffs one has to fall off first... Oh well, analogy didn't stick up, but you get my point... I found an interesting article dated 1985 that describes why the Amiga is not well suited for business. I might post it, just for kicks. David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu Signature erased, because it used to be something snide against the Mac. undergoing recnstrctn. [Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus]
navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) (03/21/91)
In article <19952@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie) writes: >In article <12017@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >>Sure, but Commodore is *not* performing its half of the dance. WE can't >>blame the engineers, they seem to be working very hard -- and if they had >>twice as many, they might actually be able to get all the things they want to >>get done, done in a reasonable amount of time. > >No, actually, that would just double the number of things we want to get >done, and the timeframes would remain the same. Sure, and who exactly would complain if that were the case? :) Perhaps I should restate and say if they had more folks, they might be able to succeed at getting the things we would like to see get done... :) :) >[Well put argument and here-here's deleted for brevity. :)] David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu Signature erased, because it used to be something snide against the Mac. undergoing recnstrctn. [Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus]
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (03/22/91)
In article <12115@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: > >Very true. However, I have *no* interest whatsoever what Cmdre is doing. I >am not affiliated with Cmdre in any way, except as a registered developer. > >What I *care* about are the results. > So in that case I guess you DO care what Commodore is doing, cause what they do and what they spend money on will affect the results. >Here is the upshot: > > 1) Microsoft is developing a lot of decent software for Apple. > 2) Lotus has developed an interesting package for Next. > 3) Neither has done anything visible for the Amiga. > [Except, maybe, AmigaBasic, gee, great :) ] > >I don't care what Cmdre is doing, they are clearly not doing *enough*. As an >interested party, that really is all we should compare, no? I can't believe >that Steve Jobs paid more than $28million to Lotus, why haven't we seen >similar results, then? Clearly Cmdre has a bigger business market than the >Next. Heck, it's kind of a cheap shot to even compare the two -- what Nexts >are selling, are going to schools, where it is not clear that business sftwre >is likely to be used, or needed. > But so far you haven't given one thing, specifically, that Commodore COULD be doing differently. Giving $28 million to Lotus? I don't think so. The reason Lotus went to the NeXT apparently was because the development environment is so easy. Yes, NeXT's sales are up, but I don't think NeXT will ever be profitable. They aren't selling THAT many. Realistically, they are only selling to colleges. If Columbia is any example, there are NO students who own NeXTs, so student ownership is negligible. It is the school's themselves who are buying for the most part. Basically, NeXTs are nice machines at an unbeatable price, but they still aren't going to succeed IMNSHO. So what should Commodore do? You're in the US. You know Commodore's image. Commodore is asking a company like Lotus, Microsoft, Fox Software, etc. to come into a market that is small "but has potential". They will either have to totally retrain their programmers, or hire outside programmers. The initial committment is very big. It just isn't easy. Basically, we have to consider the cost in dollars per amount of benefit, which is an amorphous term. Commodore knows that if they spend money on R&D, it WILL provide good results. They have history to back that up. Commodore could easily survive on its technical prowess, as long as they keep up with the game-machine market as the A500 slowly begins to lag behind. But then marketing issues are much harder. They've got some stiff price competition recently. Mac has reduced prices dramatically, introducing three new cheap models that no dealer can keep in stock, and they just slashed prices on three other models as well. Then there is NeXT... So maybe they could lower prices and let that work its marketing magic. Arriving at shows and having very presentable booths and demos is also a good way of attracting customers, as long as the shows are well chosen. Commercials and advertising in general is very risky. You pay for an enormous audience and no one could be listening. It is just real expensive. So, come up with an answer! I can't believe that EVERYONE at Commodore marketing is incompetent. 8-) We all know that Commodore hasn't been successful at becoming mainstream. But just bitching here about that fact doesn't get us anywhere. They have a very difficult task to improve their image. I'm babbling. Gotta stop doing this. >They seem to have the resources, they have the operating system, they have >what is apparently a sufficient market for some companies, so what's the >holdup? > Resources? Apple has 4x their annual sales. IBM has megabucks. NeXT has money to throw around simply because Steve Jobs doesn't care about profits. Also, if Lotus started porting today, you might wait 1 1/2 -- 2 years before you saw anything. >All bitterness is directed against Cmdre, not Ethan, of course :) :) > Same here, of course. 8) >>A tourist in New York City was overheard asking a New Yorker, > Hey, hey, I'm from NY -- we never said no such thing. Of course, then, I > never lived in the city :) > I'm from the city. Born. Raised. It depends who you ask and what they're on. 8) > >David Navas navas@cory.berkeley.edu >Signature erased, because it used to be something snide against the Mac. >undergoing recnstrctn. [Also try c186br@holden, c260-ay@ara and c184-ap@torus] -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb
u3364521@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lou Cavallo) (03/22/91)
G'day,
as Charlie Chan would've said "Ahh, Question please" (not directed to David's
and Ethan's news thread I'm following up from) but ...
What happened to the effort near the end of Xmas 89 (I think) to interest the
companies Microsoft and Lotus in a port of (any I guess) s/w to the Amiga ???
Was that effort even a real one rather than just Vapour News?
I (believe) that an AmigaWorld rumour report mentioned a "hmmm, might be, may
be" suggestion that Microsoft Works could be a candidate for an Amiga port.
I sincerely hope that I'm not leading into a vapour/flame thread here.
yours truly,
Lou Cavallo.
PS: personally I'd prefer to just have *more* good application s/w period to
having a few big name packages ... but I hasten to say that I understand
the business necessity of having packages that can be used without retr-
aining the work force. {Plus I do admit I'd *love* to shut my friend up
the next time he asks if the Amiga can run (native mode) "Lotus". :-)}
Still isn't there some room for grabbing market share with an innovative
set of new s/w applications? Imagine for instance a fully WYSIWYG TeX(*)
system with Arexx datbase hooks, spelling checker etc.. where the novice
user never even gets to know the underlying typesetting engine is TeX...
Dress this up with the finest Amiga GUI money can have programmed & sell
it for $400 (pick your currency) with great student pricing and what can
you imagine you'd say to the next person asking if the Amiga runs Word ?
Sorry if I'm getting a little heated here :-)
(*) I realise that AmigaTeX is very close for some users to this already but
I'm suggesting an interface with no TeX/LaTeX programming for the novice
whatsoever. Moreover I do appreciate the why's and wherefore's regardi-
-ng why designing a document logically rather than visually (WYSIWYG) is
likely to be better for typesetting good looking documents. I just feel
that the ideal system should let one choose when to use either method to
design a document.
{ Lastly, to preempt a technical discussion of TeX here in csa.a, I do }
{ appreciate that my suggestions have glossed over the difficulties in }
{ making such a package of TeX (projects like VorTeX notwithstanding). }mykes@sega0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) (03/23/91)
In article <12115@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) writes: >In article <1991Mar15.220940.22327@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >I don't care what Cmdre is doing, they are clearly not doing *enough*. As an >interested party, that really is all we should compare, no? I can't believe >that Steve Jobs paid more than $28million to Lotus, why haven't we seen >similar results, then? Clearly Cmdre has a bigger business market than the >Next. Heck, it's kind of a cheap shot to even compare the two -- what Nexts >are selling, are going to schools, where it is not clear that business sftwre >is likely to be used, or needed. > >They seem to have the resources, they have the operating system, they have >what is apparently a sufficient market for some companies, so what's the >holdup? > Both Apple and Next (and recently Commodore, too) have found that the educational market is a great place to get a business computer launched. By having campus-wide networks of Macintoshes, business school graduates come out with handson experience with the Mac. In the real world, these grads naturally want to use the Mac again. One thing to keep in mind is that business people tend to make decisions based upon business factors. I wish it were not true because then people would make decisions based upon what is technically the best (Amiga!). But how else can you explain why anyone would buy a PC clown? -- ******************************************************* * Assembler Language separates the men from the boys. * *******************************************************
mykes@sega0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) (03/23/91)
In article <1991Mar22.024332.15097@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: >In article <12115@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU writes: >> > The reason Lotus went to the NeXT apparently was because >the development environment is so easy. Yes, NeXT's sales are up, >but I don't think NeXT will ever be profitable. They aren't >selling THAT many. Realistically, they are only selling to >colleges. If Columbia is any example, there are NO students who >own NeXTs, so student ownership is negligible. It is the school's >themselves who are buying for the most part. Basically, NeXTs are >nice machines at an unbeatable price, but they still aren't going >to succeed IMNSHO. > > Resources? Apple has 4x their annual sales. IBM has >megabucks. NeXT has money to throw around simply because Steve >Jobs doesn't care about profits. Also, if Lotus started porting >today, you might wait 1 1/2 -- 2 years before you saw anything. > There was a rumor back in '85 when the Amiga was lauched that Lotus had ported 1-2-3 to the Amiga. The rumor goes that the port was TRIVIAL, probably because 1-2-3 is written in Lattice C (or was then) and the first real software you could get for the Amiga was Lattice C. The rumor went that Lotus was just waiting for a big enough marketplace on the Amiga to make it worth their while to spend money on advertising, etc. Maybe the market is still not big enough? -- ******************************************************* * Assembler Language separates the men from the boys. * *******************************************************
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/23/91)
In article <1991Mar22.024332.15097@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes: > But then marketing issues are much harder. They've got > some stiff price competition recently. Mac has reduced prices > dramatically, introducing three new cheap models that no dealer > can keep in stock, and they just slashed prices on three other > models as well. Then there is NeXT... Plus the Mac clones at the end of the year. Of course, they could do a port of the Motif-based Mac clone software. Given a decent O/S base (which is what it sounds like this new software is, as a complete reimplementation of the Mac O/S in a cleanroom environment) it might even run properly under Intuition. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
u3364521@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lou Cavallo) (03/23/91)
G'day, In comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Mike Schwartz (mykes@sega0.SF-Bay.ORG ) writes: > One thing to keep in mind is that business people tend to make decisions > based upon business factors. I wish it were not true because then people > would make decisions based upon what is technically the best (Amiga!). > But how else can you explain why anyone would buy a PC clown? Yes I think that many (if not most) Amigans feel similarly about that question. I've just this week been confronted with the question of quality businessware and other software by current and ex Amiga owners with strong Mac sympathies. In each case I advised (as I was asked to) you need (or should stay with) the easy to use and hard to crash Mac software. There are too many hidden stories here for me too adequately explain why this was the advice I gave but I can say that I was not happy to do so. If I had to try to explain it I'd say that the rejection of the Amiga s/w was centred on the perception of 1) unreliabilty, 2) lack of consistent interface and 3) lack of available popular big name s/w that these users had of the Ami. Going through several explanations of why I think this is not so true anymore wasn't too convincing I felt. I'm not sure I'm really contributing constructively here, sorry. I just want to shake off a little of the depression that I picked up because of this epi- sode. Perhaps someone can tell me a positive person X to Amigaite conversion story? :-) { As a trivial aside I can say these same people were very impressed when I } { left a few Amiga demos (eg Crionics) playing on my A1000. :-) } yours truly, Lou Cavallo.
lasteve@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Steven D Borrelli) (03/24/91)
Mike Schwartz writes:
Both Apple and Next (and recently Commodore, too) have found that the
educational market is a great place to get a business computer launched. By
having campus-wide networks of Macintoshes, business school graduates come
out with handson experience with the Mac. In the real world, these grads
naturally want to use the Mac again.
--------------------------
I don't want to nag, but if Cmommodore wants to be taken seriously, they better start moving. Steve Jobs knows what sells.Look at the first two targets of NeXT: Academia and Business. He knows that software sells, so he's getting all this software for his computer. They sell the NeXT in my campus bookstore (and a lot of other campuses, too), and sales are brisk. How can Amiga be taken serously if they don't cultivate an image of themselves that let other know that you can do a lot with such a slick machin
e. Don't forget, Jobs started the Mac by targetting colleges and getting cool software for it.
I know it may bias my opinion, but I just bought a NeXT. If I bought an A3000, I wouln't have been able to run a Mac-Like wordprocessor or Mathematica, or any of the three spreadsheets that are available for this *brand new* computer that has a miniscule base of users. (You can flame me for my erroneous assumption about Amiga produts, but what buisiness/productivity/science/word processing software is out there? Most people look to software when buying a computer)
And something else that commodore should worry about is the MIDI market. The NeXT xomes with a DSP5600 chip that allows manipulation of cd-quality sounds in real time. There's no midi software out for the NeXT now, but Steve Jobs is being aggressive about pushing this computer into different Markets.
People who buy Amigas and NeXT's are people who want Awsome computers and not what the corproate clowns are buying. If Commodore doesn't work on its image, its superior computer is going to be dismissed by owners of Macs and IBMs. MAybe they should look at NeXT to see what they are doing to answer the the question "how do you sell cool computers to people who are used to junk?" ;)
Steven Borrelli
lasteve@rpi.edu