From: pepin@CAM.ORG (Jean Pepin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: CDTV is dead.
Date: 20 Aug 92 08:13:55 GMT
Organization: Club Amiga Montreal

gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gregory R Block) writes:

>pepin@CAM.ORG (Jean Pepin) writes:
>: The next line was reply, this comment is postsynchrone paradoxal.

>I asked the question, I did expect an answer.  It was NOT a
>rhetoricism.  I seriously want to know if he expected C= to spill
>their guts.

Read my Peter Kittel reply about that.

>: You fail on the instinctive association of Marc Barrett = Amiga enemy,

>No.  I said he stretches the truth.  I think he does quite a bit of
>damage to the Amiga and its reputation when he makes fact-free posts
>like that.

His post is not fact-free. For CDTV by example, the 2 principal people are
left right, we can extrapolate the sales are very low right, the affirmation
CDTV is dead is logical with the fact and for me is a good thing because i
dont like game and my view about computer is with no game. The money taked for
make this naive phantasm was directly removed to the developpement of was
vanguard Amiga native and the result was to stop this vangardism.

>: logically do you think CBM need enemy when they excelling to stop
>: developpement of a great potential was Amiga corp. machine. Do you think Marc

>I don't think they "excel in the ceasing of development of the machine
>with great potential originally devised by Amiga Corp."  I think
>they're doing rather well, now.  They could do better, but they're
>surely not working to kill it.

In what base do you make your hope, can you elaborate? Are you sure they
are conscient?

>: Barrett have time to loose of flaming the CBM vedgies, if is not because he's
>: frustrated, like many first time (1985) users and developpers, to see this
>: potential wasted. Open your eyes you are near find the thuth in Krishna.

>I don't CARE why MB does it.  I don't CARE if he posts fact-filled
>cuts on the Amiga.  And/or C=.  I don't want him posting bullshit that
>people take for gospel because they think MB has the inside track,
>even though his posts have ALWAYS carried that tone.

You don't care is not a reply, CBM too don't care. I just want share your view
but YOUR affirmation about MB is NOT fact-filled to date.
 
>Too many people believe what they read, and, to say the least, it was
>highly INCONSIDERATE of MB to do that to the many people who read this
>newsgroup and would take his "felgercarb" as gospel, to steal a word I
>read recently.

And you, you believe what? The spirit of CBM? Where you read CBM doing
something last time. Correct me if i'm wrong, but the last public intervention
from CBM was "Please user write to deamon to tell him Amiga is not dead
(because we are so cheap than marketing is user responsibility) ((anyway why
CBM will take responsibility, are you not Amiga believer)).

>: Do you think only developper know what C='s doing, the only informations was

>I'm saying not EVEN developers know what C='s doing.  That's the
>point.  Certified developers don't really know all that much.  If he
>were a Commercial Developer, I'd think quite a bit differently.  But
>it's obvious he doesn't have access to as much information as he would
>have some believe by that "CDTV is DEAD" post.

>Do you see what I'm typing yet?

How do you explain Toaster not fitting in 3000, is it possible than NewTek 
was not in the confidentiallity of CBM? Is it possible CBM push the paranoia
to consider third party as competitor? Maybe Marc Barrett know the real story?

>: not spreaded at this time is source code (maybe?). CBM security is
>: professionnally like their marketing, etc. Under an extreme paranoia they
>: claim security for future developpement since all the competitor announce
>: long time before. They don't understand future announcement are related with

>It doesn't even have to be for "paranoia" reasons.  By announcing
>something that has been in development for a long time and was unknown
>to the general public, they can get more of a "surprise factor".  It
>would, theoretically, aid in marketing said product, I imagine.
>They're not great marketers, they need all the help they can get.  ;)

When are you surprise by CBM last time? For my part i'm surprise always by
their imprevisible stupidity. The best help they need is to be replaced by
intelligent people. 
 
>: sale strategy. Maybe CBM marketer think they have to submit schematic for
>: press release. This paranoia is related to Tramiel vaporware era, now they
>: don't announce before but majority of user know they exist, and we see some
>: products never going out because out of date, like Lowell board. Of course,

>That's the point:  Everything I've ever heard said the Lowell board
>was more-or-less just a big research project, it was never actually
>going to be produced or sold.  In R&D, stuff like that happens all the
>time.  Things get desgined and built that will never make it to
>market, they're just there as tests of theories which may be
>incorporated into future products.  Weeding out which ones are sold
>and which are junked is something else altogether.  How do you make a
>press announcement if you're not even sure this thing will make it out
>of development stages?

Are you heard that from Marc Barrett or from a source with a kind of charism
fitting with your attempt. Explain me the mecanism this explanation of lowell
story correspond to your believing if is not a non-disclosure information you
fail with this revelation.

Your theory of development is interesting, send your CV to CBM you have good
chance.

>: registered developper can see what CBM doing, but nobody, developper or West

>No they can't.  Any certified developer could tell you that.  And as
>to what West Chester works on, only West Chester knows.  ;)

More or less few months of difference, i'm not saying at the same time.

>: Chester team can predict when came out or what append. Only Gould decide, the
>: great dictator of Computer Bananas Monarchie.

>: The information from Marc Barrett, look most credible, try to call Gail

>It ALWAYS _LOOKS_ credible, doesn't it...  Anyone here old enough to
>remember the "War of the Worlds" radio announcement???

Give salutation from my part to Gail.

>:Wellington for example, I know CBM since 7 year, and i see many tricky gamling
>: who are most related to CBM bad reputation then just vapoware wolf call. You
>:will receive noting for defend CBM, you are a victim, you need more experience
>: with CBM for understand that.

>Nobody cares what you see.  Get used to it.  Because anything you see
>is subject to your opinions of C=, obviously bad, and your lack of
>inside information, shared by most of the people in this newsgroup.
>The only people who should be saying things like "The CDTV project is
>dead" are the people who know:  People at C=.  Correct?

Why your opinion is good about CBM, Apple has never announced Apple III, Lisa
or IIgs is dead. Is PC Junior is dead?

>: If you don't have logical reason for secret, you fall in paranoia, nobody ask
>: for chip schematic or OS source code, and i'm sure nor Apple or IBM try to
>: copy via a spec announcement, at this time they don't know CBM exist.

>I don't need a "logical reason" for any secrets I keep.  That's why
>they're secrets.  I just don't want people knowing.  Do you think
>Apple tells you EVERYTHING they do?  Don't bet on it.  They just
>happen to tell you their major products which they plan on taking to market.

WHY you don't want people know is the logical part, without WHY = irrational.
Apple tell something, see the reply to P. Kittel about that. CBM comportement
is obsessive paranoia.

>: No but their (potential) & customer. They try to supply computers and the
>: future will lean.

>: How much CDTV sale now, don't be afraid with word, a dog is a dog, Window 3.1
>:is not a fiasco. CDTV is a stupid concept, the software on that, is ridiculous
>: quality and the target market is wrong. This product have nothing to do with
>: computer but it can be better if marketed in the video club way like nitendo.

>The people at C= and all of the people at Phillips don't believe that
>a "multimedia player" is a bad idea.  That's why CDTV and CD-I exist.
>Stop spouting your opinions as god-like facts.  They have quite a bit
>to do with computers, and quite a bit to do with vcr's.  They're idiot
>boxes for information.  Dream-wise, they're meant to give ordinary
>people access to vast amounts of information that couldn't be gotten
>through television or newspapers as readily.

My fact is how much sales. We need CD-ROM for computer at same price they 
exist on the PC not a Nitendo console. At this you cannot plug a CDTV to a 
3000 nor put 68040 on the CDTV. If you are game oriented don't loose your 
time to reply, in this case our different is clear and cannot be resolved.

>BTW, it was a nice try, throwing me with big words.  But, like I said,
>I know a... few big words.


>Greg

>--
>(: (: (: (: Have you overdosed on smileys today?  Why NOT!?! :) :) :) :) :)
>(:	  "Flesh-pressing:  It's not just for politics anymore."         :)
>(:	gblock@csd4.csd.uwm.edu			Gregory R. Block         :)
>(: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (: (:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
-- 
\***  CCC AAA M   M  CLUB AMIGA MONTREAL           ------- Internet -------  
***   C   A A MM MM  C.P. 621 Succursale Victoria |   jean@ringo.CAM.ORG   |
***** C   AAA M M M  Westmount, Quebec H3Z 2Y7     ------------------------
 ***  CCC A A M   M  (514) 738-5173                Jean Pepin -- PRESIDENT
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy