🚀 go-pugleaf

Stephen Jacobs writes:

>As one of the people who has suggested such a thing in public, I'd like to
>answer.  Atari is pretty conscienscious about trying to keep a copy of any
>commercial program around (I hear this from developers).  From the discussion
>of what was done BEFORE BETA TEST on the new ROMS, it appears that they are
>also rather conscienscious about testing.  It's pretty clear that when a
>change breaks lots of software or at least one strategically important
>program, an effort is made to understand why.  Therefore, Atari gets enough

I didn't know that Atari did that, but I'm glad to hear it.  I for one,
am more concerned about whether or not my favorite programs will run
over whether I have the most well conceived OS ever designed.

Oh sure, I'd like to see the bugs fixed and see a few things run faster.
However, making >30% of applications break might not be worth it.

I happen to think that one of the things that Atari has done well has
been to come out with new products that were mostly compatible with the
old stuff.  Basically, we've only seen 2 basic designs (8-bit/16-bit) in
the 10 years (more or less) that Atari has been selling computers.  Many
companies change their OS faster than (#include appropriate simile).

				Ron Abramson

P.S. My opinions are my own! (I think)