🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1830@atari.UUCP>, kbad@atari.UUCP (Ken Badertscher) writes:
> daniel@pkmab.se (Daniel Deimert) writes:
> 
> | I'm still looking for some kind of information about how to program
> | the new chips in the STe.
> 
> Atari Corp. policy is that we offer developer support to registered
> developers, not to end users.  I know how you feel about the issue,
> and I'm sorry if you feel "left out."  It seems to me, though, that it
> just wouldn't be cost effective for us to offer the level of technical
> support we give to developers to end users.

Except for the fact that I don't give much for Atari Corp. policy,
I still think this is an isane behaviour.  In short sight, it might not
pay off informing end users, but I can assure you -- you won't be able
to sell a lot of computers if you don't tell them how to program it!

I do understand it is impossible to, for example, send out information
to each and every user that bought a ST, but it must be possible to
post a minimum of information to some knowledgeable people in the right
places.

The net, if used right, could be a source of inside information about
how to do things [like the posting of ARGV defs! *GREAT*] and what not
to do. And there're a lot of developers on the net, too.

And people from the net DO forward things to the right places. In a
few days, many more than those who read news would know.  Interesting
information is spread further through FidoNet and by mail, personal
contacts and phone calls.

Let's say that I tell 15 people how to do.  They tell 15 more each,
and in a week at least 15^5 persons would know how to do.  This is
around 760000 people! (To be compared to around 400000 STs in Sweden...)

This isn't cost effective?

"Who ask"? 

It should at least be "cost effective" to give this information to
developers without them having to ask!  It is ATARI that should be trying
to get more customers, more developers and more programming done on the
ST -- this implicates more STs sold. Right?  Not the so called end user
trying furiosly to get his computer.

Why should I buy a computer I can't use?  Like buying a car and when
you ask for an explanation of the buttons getting the answer: "Sorry,
you have to be a registred driver to get to know this.  You shouldn't
know about more than the gear and the wheel."


A lot of people have been complaining on Atari Corp. lately, and even
more people have been complaining about this.

Have nobody thought of the possibility that there might be something
wrong? Why should we otherwise be bashing Atari? No, we only want to get
the most out of the computer. 

Someone wrote that there must be a lot of people who wanted to take
care of one bug each.  I would love to, but I don't think this is possible.
But we ARE doing our best to help!
I have offered to help writing some demonstration programs to be put
on the STE language disk. I haven't even got a reply.   Atari Corp. was
obviosly not interested.

I do not want Atari Corp. to die -- I want to have an Atari computer,
otherwise I wouldn't have bought a STE.  But I do want to be able to program
it without paying more money than necessary money for it!

[BTW, I will soon post a couple of examples of how to program the STE.
 A lot of thanks to Ralph Haglund, qralph@dna.lth.se, for the translation
 from german!]
 
 And to those from Atari who're reading this:   Wouldn't it have been
cost effective posting slightly more than two pages of text to the net?
 One thing more:  Why not give this to the responsible people? I know
it isn't your fault, Ken and Allan.

Disclaimer:  After all, this is *MY* opinion.

-- 
    Daniel Deimert, Fridstavagen 4, S-715 94 Odensbacken, SWEDEN
    Internet:	daniel@pkmab.se
    UUCP:	...{uunet,mcvax}!sunic.sunet.se!kullmar!pkmab!daniel