🚀 go-pugleaf

In <321.27552470@vger.nsu.edu>, manes@vger.nsu.edu writes:
>
>It was this very thing that caused me to start looking at every installation
>script.  It was a education. :-)

This is an education I received long before ARP came along. I would set up my
system to do what I wanted it to do, and some script would cause me hours of
problems after trashing my setup.

>Larry, how about all those folks who *dont* know what ARP is, and what
>the potential problems they may endure?  What about the people who bought
>the Amiga to use it, and who have not invested the time to 'learn' the
>CLI commands and their potential effects?  I dare say that most Amiga
>users don't understand many concepts that you (and I) take for granted.

While this is true, I would hasten to point out that ARP was not alone in this.
Many programs, PD and commercial, caused problems, either through sloppy
programming, or through a misplaced 'This is the only way we allow you to do
it' attitude. As a final point, I refer you to DiskDoctor, which was supplied
by CBM, and has been mistaken for a virus since it became available, and as
recently as last week, on this very network.

>Larry, you lost me there.  Was there a company that I could call and get
>questions answered about it?

No, there was a group of people you could call about it, or who could be asked
questions via various networks, this one included. Calling the CBM customer
support line has not been cnsistently productive for most; being referred to a
local dealer is not always helpful, if that dealer knows less than you do about
the machine.

If you include documentation as 'support', you might consider that ARP came
fully documented, while the Amigados commands were documented in a third party
book. I wish I could count the number of people who _learned_ how to use the
CLI because of the ARP documentation.

>When ARP first came out, if memory serves, it was for AmigaDOS 1.2.  
>Commodore's concentration at that time was working on a standard for
>booting hard disks, this certainly is much more important than the
>oddities of the BCPL based CLI commands.

Do you really think so? I never had much of a problem with booting from floppy.
My startup-sequence at that time consisted of about three commands or so, and
time spent reading from floppy was minimal. Now if you want to talk about hard
disk standardization, and making them work properly, I would agree that it was
of more importance than purging BCPLisms, though I would point out that this
goal was only one of the stated goals of ARP. Consistency was another, and the
ARP commands were more consistent. Size was another, and they succeeded there.
Providing things like argument parsing and file requesters, resource tracking,
and so on... all these goals were met. Again, nobody was forced to use the
entire distibution.

>My concern is that 'replacement' commands not supplied from Commodore may
>not always be 100% compatible, and introduce a "unreliability belief" in
>the work that Commodore has done.  If Commodore's work was ok, then why
>would someone want to replace it?  Ah, it must be buggy.  You and I 
>know different, but will the rest of the world?

Comodore provided ample reason for folks to feel that the Amiga (including the
CLI commands) was unreliable. As you know, CBM's work passed through the entire
range of reliability and functinality from 'totally buggy' and 'nearly
unusable' to where it is today. Part of that increased functionality we see
from CBM today, if not the increased reliability, is due to CBM adopting ideas
and/or programs put out by non-CBM people, including the ARP folks.

>I certainly grant that for the knowledgable user, ARP gives many wonderful
>things.  Certainly the most important is the freedom of choice.  I suppose
>if all users were knowledgable I would not have a beef with ARP.  

If all users were knowledgeable, I would _still_ have a beef with DiskDoctor
and Join, to name just two CBM-supplied programs, and with a great variety of
commercial offerings. Owning a computer is like owning anything else. A
certain rudimentary knowledge is required, as well as the knowledge of your own
limitations, if you are to run anything but single commercial programs, one at
a time.


>Unfortunately as you and I both know, there is a steep learning curve in
>using the Amiga and having programs that  rely on ARP only makes
>it more difficult.  Perhaps if the ARP commands came with different names
>so that the Commodore supplied set was not replaced there would not be
>a problem, as the 'experienced' user could delete the Commodore one with
>the knowledge of what he/she is doing.   Further, if it was easy to
>identify the difference (without comparing byte sizes) between the ARP
>command set and the Commodore set then the problem would be less.

It is relatively easy to identify the ARP commands, and the way to do it is
documented. type the command name with a question mark, and it shows a
template, as do the CBM commands. Typa another question mrk, and a different,
usually more detailed explanation of the command is given. Just part of the
increased functionality of ARP commands.

>I am certain that ECHO is on the less than dangerous side of things, don't
>you think?  MOUNT on the other hand, if you wrote a replacement for it, and
>called it MOUNT I would flame you.  There is a difference.

Certainly it's less dangerous, but I did name it the same. What if I had
written a MOUNT that corrected a problem inherent in the CBM MOUNT, and called
it MOUNT? Would I still get a flame for it? If I called it something other than
MOUNT, it would njust mean that a lot of folks would rename it to MOUNT, just
as anyone is free to rename any ARP program to something else. Personally,
after DIR, LIST, and LS, I have a problem with attempting to come up with
another meaningful name, should I actually want to keep some of the others
around.

>Help is a relative term.  The only people who prospered from ARP where those
>who understood what it was, and why it was.  It did not HELP those who did
>not realize (perhaps care?) about the problems with the Commodore supplied
>commands.

Agreed. The only people who benefit from a word processor are those that
require its functionality, and use it.

>I am not knocking the idea of ARP, but I am knocking the implementation and
>the original arrogance of the individuals who were involved with the 
>AmigaDOS Replacement Project (the original name).

I didn't see the ARP authors as arrogant at all. I do see folks like MSS as
arrogant; providing commercial releases that break the rules, that are buggy,
and so on, who will, when asked if they are going to be fixing XModem in the
next release, will answer with "Well, probably not, you are only the second
person to request that enhancement.".

The ARP authors saw a problem, and offered to help out. When that offer was
declined, they struck out on their own to provide what they saw as relief to
users and programmers alike. That they now receive flames for doing so is a
surprise to me, since nobody is forcing anyone to all or any part of it.

Anyway, I think this about beats my point of view to death. :-)

-larry

--
The only things to survive a nuclear war will be cockroaches and IBM PCs.
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 
|   //   Larry Phillips                                                 |
| \X/    lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips |
|        COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322  -or-  76703.4322@compuserve.com        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+