| From: | Steenbergh, Barry |
| Date: | 14 Sep 2000 at 14:02:51 |
| Subject: | RE: AMIOPEN: VP vs native binaries |
Hello all,
Just hoping to add my $0.02 here...
<Lots of insightful dialog snipped>
>
> It would be sufficient to provide _x86_ versions only, which
> would limit
> those applications (and thus Ami) to the market where it would have to
> compete vs. Microsoft.
>
> All this from the point of view that companies like "Big
> Bill" could try
> to make Ami a failure by _providing_ software. Nasty, but that�s the
> way Microsoft operates.
I don't think this will be an issue. Say for example Microsoft ports Words
*shudder* to the Ami platform. Why would they want to include only an x86
version? They already have that and it is selling well...MS Word for
Windows. If they did not want to write one application that would run on
(essentially) every system supported by Ami, they would just stick to the
platform they ALREADY have support for...Windows. MS is a very underhanded
and unfair company who would not think twice about using every dirty trick
they can think of, but I think they'd be doing themselves a disservice by
only providing an x86 binary.
<Snip again>
> So it would be a good idea to ensure the presence of .00 binaries
> _now_, so the hardware shift _could_ take place later. Even if
> some companies are not evil-minded, they could just be lazy:
> "Our app is so big, why ship two sets of binaries if x86 is covering
> 95% of the market? Gee, we could save the CD space and put on
> yet more fonts, clip-arts, ads or whatever instead..."
True, but (supposedly) VP binaries are often smaller than native binaries
(heh heh...take a look at x86 assembler...I don't doubt it for a minute).
AND by supplying VP binaries they could cover 100% of the market rather than
95%.
--Barry Steenbergh
Subscribe/Unsubscribe: open-request@amiga.com
Amiga FAQ: http://www.amiga.com/faq.html