🚀 go-pugleaf

> 
> 
> From what I understand, the new Atari has been carrying on the old
> Commodore tradition of being relatively unfriendly to the press & 
> software developers (note high price on the pre-release developement
> kit....it required a major investment from people who didn't know
> how tha merket was going to go).   BYTE gets information sent to it
> more than it goes looking for it.....they get more than enough info
> that way that they don't HAVE to go looking...they have more than they
> can handle as it is (note the 3-4 month lag time).   If Atari sent
> them a machine, they would review/preview it....if they (Atari) DON'T
> send a machine for review, the review will have to wait until BYTE has
> a bit of slack in the material available to it.....don't blame BYTE
> for Atari's PR faults.  
> 
> 			-Richard Hartman
> 			max.hartman@ames-vmsb
> 

I still feel that Byte's responsibility, as a member of the Press, is
to give us the information that is important to us. The ST is, I feel,
more important than a new IBM compatible. It should not matter what is
*convenient* for them. They should have tracked down an ST and wheedled
Tramiel into giving them info. I don't think they tried... I do blame
Byte if they are not flexible enough to go out of their way when the
situation warrants it.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Erik James Freed
			   Aurora Systems
			   San Francisco, CA
			   {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed