🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <13386@cbmvax.commodore.com> daveh@cbmvax (Dave Haynie) writes:
> Sure, we do get to play.  But that's a Good Thing; if we didn't, there would
> all these extra bugs once the thing is released...

Makes sense. Still, you shouldn't go around saying "ours is real because I've
seen it and I haven't seen Intel's". They can say the same thing about you,
you know.

> >Intel keeps trying to tell us that we don't need bugs fixed: they'll be fixed
> >in V.4. I'm beginning to think of it as an excuse instead of a release.

> We have much the same situation with 1.3 vs. 2.0 as well.

Yeh, but we're not paying for a support contract with you guys.

> And the lack of X (or at least some kind of graphics subsystem) isn't
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> considered a feature if you're doing hardware work; we work in symbols, not
> text!

I didn't say graphics were a bug. I said X was a bug. Not only is it big, but
it's primitive. ALL the windows are SIMPLEREFRESH! And putting window
management in the application program is just plain *sick*. It's like making
the STDIO library do erase and kill processing.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.