From: mkoch@amisys.UUCP (Mike Koch)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: Do you agree with AC TECH's assessment?
Date: 10 Sep 92 08:03:35 GMT
Organization: AMiSYS Consulting
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith

In article <53051@dime.cs.umass.edu> barrett@snoopy.cs.umass.edu (Daniel Barrett) writes:
> 
> 	Do you agree that AC TECH is publishing material that is interesting
> to "high end users and developers?"  I don't.  I've written to Gamble about
> this but never received a response.

I don't either.  As I was reading Mr.  Gamble's editorial, I actually started
to chuckle.  If he thinks they are reaching their intended audience, then he
definately has a different idea of who their audience is than I do.  Or maybe
I just expect Amiga tech rags to be similar to what Transactor or AmigaWorld's
Tech Journal were.

As I thumbed through the latest issue, I decided that I will not renew my
subscription when it runs out.  For my interests and tastes, they just don't
give me what I want.  I've wasted enough money.
 
> 	I keep seeing non-technical articles in AC TECH, and they are
> boring.
 
> 	Then in the latest issue, they published a fluffy review of
> Quarterback 5.02 which IMHO did not belong in a technical magazine.  ("What

Nor, in my opinion, did the article on tape drives (and I own one, so don't
think I'm just complaining because it's something I wouldn't be interested
in).  Sure, the article had a certain technical angle to it, but a little
reworking would have made it appealing to a much larger audience.  Developers
aren't the only ones with tape drives, you know.

> does a backup program do?" says the article.  Dar dee dar dee dar.)  The
> reviewer (Merrill Callaway -- I don't know if that name is male or female,
> so I'll assume female) missed or glossed over some of the programs
> shortcomings.

Except for this particular article, I've always enjoyed Callaway's work.  What
really strikes me as odd is the fact that s/he has had several very good ARexx
programming articles published in the regular AC magazine.  Why weren't those
in AC's Tech instead of the QB review?  The QB review was obviously written
with the new user in mind, and as such, had no business being in AC's Tech.
 
> 	BTW, if anyone says "If you want more technical articles, write them
> yourself" -- I've already done that.  In fact, they published my article.

That's not the point anyway.  I didn't pay good money to read my own stuff.  I
can do that by reading our user group's newsletter, which I write, edit and
publish every month.

> And in the process, they introduced about a dozen errors into it, even
> though I submitted it ON DISK.

Speaking of the disk, why are there so many pages of program listings?  Since
the stuff is already on the disk, it's wasteful to repeat them in the
magazine.  I can understand printing certain sections of code, in order to
explain a certain method or technique, but full listings are a waste.  Mr.
Gamble mentioned that they receive hundreds of submissions every month.  If
they'd drop the program listings, they'd be able to fit quite a bit more into
each issue.  Hell, in the previous issue, they only included enough of a
program listing to fill the page, then included a notice that the rest of that
particular listing could be found on the disk (V2N3, page 46).

When AmigaWorld's Tech Journal went under, I really hoped that the quality of
AC's Tech would go up.  After all, now there should have been more
high-quality articles for them to choose from, right?  Or did all of those
people who wrote for AWTJ just stop writing?  <Sigh>  I got more useful
information out of .info's tiny, 10-page tech section than I've ever gotten
from any issue of AC's Tech.

If I had the resources, I'd consider putting together something along the
lines of the old "Amigan Journeyman & Apprentice" magazine.  I only ever saw a
couple of those, which belonged to a friend that I haven't seen in years.
That was another great technical publication.
-- 

=============================================================================
Mike Koch       rehab1!amisys!mkoch@cbmvax.commodore.com      CI$: 70017,2677