From: lindblad@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Jarkko Lindblad)
Subject: Re: Advocacy? What do you want for the Amiga?
Organization: University of Helsinki
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 14:11:51 GMT

Marc N. Barrett (barrett@iastate.edu) wrote:
> In article <1993Jan9.224236.9800@klaava.Helsinki.FI> lindblad@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Jarkko Lindblad) writes:
> >Marc N. Barrett (barrett@iastate.edu) wrote:
> >> In article <1inccgINNqbh@flop.ENGR.ORST.EDU> dstuve@storm.CS.ORST.EDU (David Stuve) writes:
> >
> >> >A word processor/database/drawing/spreadsheet/communications package?
> >> >How much would you be willing to pay for such a monster?
> >> 
> >>    $170.  That's how much MicroSoft Works costs.  I still say that it should
> >> be packaged with high-end and mid-range Amigas, since Apple packages 
> >> Claris Works with many of their systems.
> >
> >And the word processor of this package is at least as good as Word for
> >Windows? And the spreadsheet is at least as good as Excel? And so on.
> >According to you everything that's below Word for Windows or Excel or
> >comparable products is not good enough.
> 
>    There you go again, comparing watermelons and grapefruit.

Actually not. Well, a bit, but its only because your text is so funny
to read at 4 pm. At 4 am it's something I can't usually stand.

>    I compare standalone word processors to standalone word processors, and
> integrated software (like 'works' packages) to integrated software.  So when

Does this make those 'normal users' of yours only need less features
on some applications? It's funny how you first advocate that word
processors which is notr as good as Word for Windows is useless and then
you advocate a integrated software package which definately does not
have a wp of this quality. So suddenly the users don't need a word
processors as good as they used to a couple days ago...
	Not that I don't agree that comparing Word to Works is like
comparing apples & ranges (or whatever word is used on that farm-state
you live in). However, there is no point for you (ooops, it is YOU I'm
responding to :) to advocate Works if it's wp don't fullfill the
standards you have set for a word processor.

> I need to compare Final Copy II or ProWrite to something, I compare them 
> to MS Word or Word Perfect for MAC/Windows .  After all, Final Copy II, 
> ProWrite, MS Word, and Word Perfect are all standalone word processors.  But
> when comparing software in 'works' packages, it should be compared to 

And this does make up the fact that both packages and standalone wp's
are used for (surprise surprise) word processing...?

> similar software in other 'works' packages.  Thus, if Commodore were to write
> a 'works' package to be included with some Amiga system, the included word
> processing, spreadsheet, database, and drawing software would be compared to
> the word processing, spreadsheet, database, and drawing software included
> with Claris Works or MS Works.  (However, Commodore should endeavor to make
> the software much better than the software in other 'works' packages, because
> Commodore has lots and lots of catching up to do)

YOu forgot to add ths to end: ...also Commodore should make the OS,
the custom chips, marketing and loads of other things much better than
they now are as they have lots of catching up to do.


      *
*      *
  ***  *
*      *
      *

( a global smiley, partially targeted to whole message. )

-- 
Jarkko Lindblad         | sleep my friend and you will see
lindblad@cc.helsinki.fi | that dream is my reality
------------------------| they keep me locked up in this cage
          - MetallicA - | can't they see it's why my brain say rage