🚀 go-pugleaf

> Keywords: 1.2 news
> 
> [ Go ahead line eater, mak  my d y. ]
> 
> I just heard something that kind of makes me, an avowed Amiga fanatic (and
> strong critic) almost feel like getting rid of mine.  The bad news
> relates to 1.2.  Supposedly, a lot of the software on the market for the
> Amiga will not run under 1.2.

Some won't, but most of it will.  Any program that breaks any rules, as
outlined in the Rom Kernal Manuals, might not work under 1.2.  And guess
what -- the Rom Kernal Manual, since the days of the read and white
version used before the Amiga was released, specifically stated that
breaking any of these programming rules might result in the offending 
program becoming obselete in future releases of the OS.  I'd expect the
1.2 system to be much more compatible with 1.1 than similar upgrades in
other computer systems (MS-DOS, for example).

> Thus, Commodore/Amiga, in its infinite wisdom,
> has decided to (or is at least thinking about) putting 1.1 INSTEAD of 1.2
> in the new (and current) Amigas!  Yes, you are reading this correctly, and
> I am getting this from a reliable source.

Mind revealing the source (mail is OK if you're shy about it).  I don't
know if Commodore-Amiga has an official date to switch over shipping 1.2
instead of 1.1; of course, since 1.2 hasn't been officially released yet,
you wouldn't expect it to be included in the Amiga box you buy today.  But
1.2 will DEFINATELY be included at some point (like I said, I've got no
official date, but I know this to be true) with Amiga systems.

> How is 1.2 going to be used?  It's going to be treated like an "add on."
> An EXTRA COST add-on!  They will probably only charge only $15 or so, but
> the point is that 1.2 will not automatically come in Amigas, and there
> will be little incentive for programmers to use its extra features.

I don't know if they've set the policy yet or not; they were first talking
about mailing 1.2 out free, just like 1.1, then they were talking about 
charging a small fee for the upgrade.  I repeat, UPGRADE!  There'd be no
point in any of the enhancements of 1.2 if it weren't going to be the 
supported release of the Amiga OS.  These things cost lots of programmer
$$$$, they're not free.  And a price of $10 or $15 wouldn't be outrageous
for an OS upgrade package; have you priced Lotus 1-2-3 or Mac ROM upgrades
lately?  And they make you give back your old disks/ROMs!

> Personally, I think it should be the other way around, with 1.2 packaged
> with the new machines, and 1.1 available as an option.

I see little reason for 1.1 remaining out at all.  Any programs that don't 
work under 1.2 can be debugged and upgraded by their manufacturers (who've
more than likely had Beta copies of 1.2 all summer, at the least), and in
the interim all current Amiga owners will still have their 1.1 disk
around (I know I've got mine somewhere).  But user's of 1.2 will be a
growing majority once its released, and any software company that has
code which specifically counts on undocumented things in 1.1 would be 
foolish not to upgrade to 1.2.  How many PC users out there still use
MS-DOS 1.0?

> Wasn't there a similar problem in upgrade compatibility with the different
> versions of MS-DOS?  I know that there was with the Apple II series.

There's often a problem in compatibility from version to version of an
operating system.  I think MS-DOS changed so much from 1.0 to 2.0 that
very little would run that well on 2.0.  This can come from a poor OS
design (having to be redesigned), or it can come from programmers 
bypassing the OS.  In the C64 (and probably the Apple II), programmers
got in the habit of jumping to ROM subroutines regardless of whether or
not these were listed as supported (i.e. they stay the same) or not
supported (i.e. they change completely around).  Because of this, it was
impossible to fix bugs or add features to the C64 Kernal.  The Amiga 
development books told developers from the beginning what they'd have to do 
to remain 100% compatible with future releases of the OS.  And they meant
it.  The Amiga's OS provides nearly anything you'd ever want in the way
of capabilities, all in a very transparent (from OS to OS release) way.
There's actually just 1 fixed address in all of the machine's operating
system.  If a programmer decided to disreguard these warnings, don't
blame it on the Amiga.

> I hate to start flames flying, but I think this news deserves some attention.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Rodney Ricks
> 
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Haynie	{caip,ihnp4,allegra,seismo}!cbmvax!daveh

			HAPPY NEW YEAR!

	"Laws to supress tend to strengthen what they would prohibit.
	 This is the fine point on which all the legal professions of
	 history have based their job security."
						-Bene Gesserit Coda

These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they may be yours too.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~