🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <90004.202106IMS103@PSUVM.BITNET>, IMS103@PSUVM.BITNET writes:
> >If Atari, or anyother company publishes software for other systems,
> >it isn't a sign that their own system is a failure, but as a way to
> >make money, THAT'S BUSINESS!
> 
> >Yes, and in no uncertain terms, this is a flame. [...]
> 
> >Mark Newton-John
> 
> IBM does not make Apple software,  Commodore does not make IBM software,
> Apple does not make Atari software,  Hewlett Packard does not make
> C64 software, but Atari makes Amiga software.  Atari is just wasting
> time and enegry that they could use elsewhere like fixing bugs, updating
> computers and bringing out software for their *own* computer systems.
> 
> --
> Ian Smith <ims103@psuvm.bitnet>

Microsoft makes software for other systems, Word Perfect makes
software for other systems. What difference doers it make, if a
hardware manufacturer decides, through a subsidiary, decides to
publish software?

My main argument stands. If Atari can make money publishing for
other systems, what is wrong with that? If you think that a
hardware company must for now and forever, be a hardware company,
and only publish for it's own system, then sell your Atari, if you
have one, and get the competition. Apparently, they are, and do.

But if Atari can diversify, and expand into other areas, then more
power to them. Geez, even the auto companies have other interests
other than car manufacturing, look at Mitsubishi (aircraft,
*computers*, consumer electronics, banking, etc). What have you
against Atari expanding into publishing?

Mark Newton-John

-- 
--
   (ames att sun)!pacbell! \      Sakura-mendo, CA
           ucdavis!csusac! - sactoh0!mfolivo
              uunet!mmsac! /      the good guys!