| From: | Martin Baute |
| Date: | 13 Sep 2000 at 13:37:05 |
| Subject: | Re: AMIOPEN: Re: |
Hello Claus
On 12-Sep-00, you wrote:
>> To avoid companies doing so (perhaps under pressure from Redmond),
>> there should be some way for the OS to _enforce_ the presence of
>> .00 (VP) binaries in any installation archive. However I don�t have any
>> way of enforcing this at hand.
> Enforcing the presence of a .00 binary could be done indirectly be Amiga
> Inc: they could refuse to approve software which doesn't include the .00
> version. This won't stop other companies from providing not portable
> version of their software. (But it won't make much sense economically for
> them.)
Yes? How so? The companies with a _motive_ to do so couldn�t care
less for if their software is "approved by Amiga" or not...
> Customers would go for software with the boing badge to be sure to
> buy future proof software.
Customers went for soft- and hardware "designed for Windows 95"
just the same. Don�t overestimate Joe Average�s sense for quality.
> I don't see too much of a problem here ... am I missing something?
The fact that, outside of "geek country", Microsoft is still considered
to be providing the best in software?
Seriously, I fear the whole "ubiquity" concept might become undermined
by native-only distributions, either by big companies (like M$) or
fanatic Amigians who refuse to include a .00 binary in addition to their
PPC one. (The latter would probably have less impact in the long run,
but would be a nuisance nevertheless.)
Regards
Subscribe/Unsubscribe: open-request@amiga.com
Amiga FAQ: http://www.amiga.com/faq.html