🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5435.2760c937@zeus.unomaha.edu>, bacon@zeus.unomaha.edu writes:

> RE: What's Wrong with ARP.

   I'll sum up one more time. 

> Hasn't the point about ARP been made moot since WB 2.0 (soon to be 2.1)
> has been incorporated into it??

   Practically. Since I got 2.0 I have not had _any_ interest in the ARP
commands. The C: commands are small, really tiny, and many are internal to
the Shell. There are of course differences, but with 2.0 the major reasons
ARP was done (BCPL, primarily!) are gone :-)
  
> For those of us who may be less than enlightened, like you, would you 
> mind telling us what some of the pitfalls of using ARP are? 

   Mostly scripts breaking and other incompatibilities around the Shell.
These might not be apparent until someday you Execute an update script or
similar. 

> Also, those of us who have A1000's or A500's will have to stick to something
> like the ARP set unless we shell out the bucks for chip upgrades and the 
> boards to go with them since WB2.X requires the Agnus 1meg chip.

   I've successfully tested 2.0 on an A2000A with the old (thin) Agnus. No
problem, the 1meg Agnus story is just another stoopid rumour. The 2.0 ROM's
will fit any Amiga with a ROM socket, though a single trace may be needed.

> Please don't flame me for any ignorance.  All of us are at different levels
> of experience and this is a public forum.

   OK, I won't. :-) 


                                                  -Henrik

______________________________________________________________________________
| Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data | If the Doors of Perception where cleansed, |
| ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!  | Man would see Reality as it is - Infinite. |
\______cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen___|_________________________________W. Blake___/