| From: | Daniel Robbins |
| Date: | 7 Aug 2000 at 16:50:10 |
| Subject: | Re: AMIOPEN: To Windoze or Not to Windoze |
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 09:21:58AM -0400, Aaron Ruscetta wrote:
>
> Cool. I'm in the majority, too then! I certainly agree (and have never
> forgotten) that the *goal* is host independence. That has never been
> questioned in any of my posts. Unfortunately, a windoze based SDK
> release at this time will not be anywhere near that goal [..snip..]
I have a hard time responding to confusing comments like these. Too
vague, convoluted and unsupported.
> -- It is a matter of simple logic to contend that supporting windoze
> to achieve OS alternatives is a self contradictory proposition. Even
> simpler logic establishes the founding proof that Using windoze =
> Supporting windoze = Diminishing alternatives.
Your logic is faulty. Amiga is in no position right now to in any way
influence the use of Windows products worldwide, for several reasons:
1. The lack of an Amiga OE geared towards end users
2. Very few Amiga developers relative to the installed Windows user base
3. Windows SDK users will very likely *already* have Windows installed
on their machine, and have no plans to remove Windows from their PC.
> -- It is extremely reasonable to question the value of soliciting
> windoze based developers when, despite the vast weight of the monopoly
> numbers, the overwhelming majority of alternative, innovative,
> altruistic and open source contributions to computing are directly
> atributable to Unix, Linux, Amiga and other non-windoze communities
> (including little things like the internet and the world wide web).
Here is another area where you make a sweeping generalization. The
overwhelming majority? Who made you judge of all software? I think
it's pretty clear that your favoritism of non-Microsoft software is
based on your personal dislike of the company rather than any kind of
even-handed observations.
> -- It is quite sensible to wonder at the wisdom of promoting and
> demonstrating the New Amiga on windoze systems prematurely, while its
> performance is still so severely inhibited by, and dependent upon, the
> windoze environment. First impressions are always the most lasting and
> publicized impressions; if the introduction to the windoze arena is
> weak at any level, then the future views, acceptance and
> marketability of of the Amiga OE could be damaged.
Argh.
> -- It is totally valid to challenge Amiga OE market assumptions for
> the windoze world based on industry history and other evidence of
> indistinct market boundaries and related patterns of user migration.
I guess you don't understand what point Amiga, Inc. is currently at
strategically.
> -- It is very fair to ask just how much easier to use and/or more
> accessable a windoze SDK would actually be compared to the current
> Linux offerings. All things considered, there would seem to be a
> fairly equal potential for complications with SDK installation and
> operation when running on top of any environment.
False.
> Contentions have never been that Linux is some "perfect world", but
> for simple reliablity, the long term track record shows it to be
> demonstrably superior to any M$-OS offering that has been around for
> any length of time. At present, it seems quite fair to claim that for
> SDK performance and reliablity, running on Linux will remain the most
> effective development and demonstration environment for Tao/Amiga, at
> least until the stand-alone SDK and OE are completed. Issues of
> installation convenience and accessability are where the question
> marks still reside.
So, again, Aaron is in the position of deciding for humanity which
operating systems are "acceptable". To anyone reading this message:
if you happen to be running Windows, please throw the machine out the
window -- because Aaron says Windows isn't stable!
I said this:
> The anti-Windows SDK argument does not make sense at all. It's
> totally misguided. And I happen to be someone who is very involved
> in the Linux community -- having my own Linux distribution and being
> a regular columnist for the IBM developerWorks Linux Zone. Let the
> bigotry end!
You said this:
> I totally agree that the techno-bigotry should be avoided. We might
> make a good start by re-examining the implications of the first two
> sentences of the paragraph above.
"The anti-Windows SDK argument does not make sense at all. It's
totally misguided."