From: gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block)
Subject: Re: CDTV is dead.
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:19:22 GMT

pepin@CAM.ORG (Jean Pepin) writes:
: I mean by impartial, "sales & money relation". You have large view over NDA.
: MB don't fail with NDA with their affirmation. But fail NDA is no risk since
: CBM is not very impressive legally speaking.

I really have no idea what you meant.  If you meant that he's not
being paid by C=, neither are most of the others here, that makes them
about as impartial.  However, he's a developer:  That rules out
impartiality right there.

Don't make the mistake of looking for an impartial opinion.  Look for
an opinion which is made under the kinds of influences you yourself is
under.  Someone who is exposed to the same kinds of things as you is
more likely to have an opinion you would agree with than someone who
is totally opposite of you.

I take it you don't lie through your teeth, right?

: Where is CBM credibility.

I'm not defending CBM here.  As a matter of fact, I'm not DEFENDING
anything.  I'm saying that if you're looking for credibility, you're
looking to the wrong people.

: Where is your fact about CDTV isn't dead? MB affirmation are based on 2

His "fact" was an extrapolation.  C= has since said that CDTV isn't
dead:  There's nowhere else to go than from the source, is there?  If
C= says they're going to continue to sell Amigas, then you've got to
trust them:  They're the ones making it, designing it, selling it, and
making money off it.

Just like they are with CDTV.

: responsable people of CDTV are left. You write the fact about AmigaVision and

No, it's not that two people are LEFT in CDTV development.  One left
for another job, the other was fired.  Gail's firing is sad.  Yes.
But it happens.

That does not mean that CDTV is dead.  It's Bushnell's idea, if anyone's.

: you don't agree about the logical deduction. I what base you take your
: optimistics dreams?

It's not a logical deduction.  IBM fires people all the time.  Does
that mean that IBM is dead?  No.

:CBM bankrupcy?, $21.9M Loss For 4Q, Stock Drops stock dropped $2.25, closing a

Not likely.  Look closer at what people are saying about it, and I
mean the financial analysts.  Don't make widespread claims unless
you're a little informed.  Being a little informed would probably rank
under reading the Wall Street Journal.  Where they tell you that the
numbers aren't everything.

Of course, telling MB that the numbers aren't everything will get you
nowhere fast.

:$6.87. Atari launche a machine in a same potential market, with better price &
:feature. But "moumoune" Gould announce new machines for end of the year, these
:machines exist for more then a year, Ask Ethan Solamita about these machines,
:this is the rabbit and turtle story the sequel.

It's been "released" for a day now, supposedly.  The announcement
should have been made before the end of the show it was being intro'd
at, and it hasn't happened.  It ended yesterday.

:Do you believe CBM announcement regularity at this time, proove the company is
: alive? Maybe this CBM strategy is convenable for your attempt.

Releasing products does make me believe that the company is alive,
yes.  Doesn't it make you think that?  People don't release new
products for sale unless they plan on being around to sell them.

: Maybe is credible if he says something, but he say nothing. He's here for
: what? If he not represent C=, he have to remove this from his address. If C=
: employees form a distinc society, i suggest a newsgroup
: comp.cbm.employee.distinct.society.secret. His facts where you see facts?

He's here because he likes to read.  And he doesn't have to remove
C='s address from his.  Why?  He's posting from that machine.  Because
I post from a UWM Computing Services Division computer I work for UWM
in the CSD department?  No.  I'm a student.

Who happens to be working hard on their gopher site.  ;)

: Sorry but another time where is the CBM facts???
: Gail Wellington is out. This is a fact from MB do you believe this one?
: Repeat after me "Only CBM is credible".

Gail Wellington WAS fired.  We know that because CBM tells us that.
CDTV is NOT dead.  We know that because CBM tells us that.

You can go to rumors if you want, but if the company in question is
GIVING you information, isn't it a little dumb to assume otherwise?

How is it that you can believe Marc Barrett telling you that CDTV is
dead, when C= tells you otherwise?

Marc Barrett has proved himself scum by not retracting that message
which appeared over 150 posts (under this subject) ago.  I think very
little of him just for that.  If he'd retracted it, I'd have thought
much better.

: Talk for you.

Fortunately, I do.

: PS: Sometimes you put your intervention in the middle of sentence inside a
: paragraph, are you releted with the indentation routine for ProPage? :)

I'm far more evolved than an indention.  When a paragraph has multiple
ideas within it that need to be adressed, I insert the relevant
comments in, for ease of reading.  That way, nobody gets confused as
to what lines refer to what replies.

Greg

--
(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :) :)
(: "...and here's Clinton giving the correct spelling of bong-resin..."  :)
(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block         :)
(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy