From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Wed Jul 13 04:38:57 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=1DFfH+pJLr8Pb03L1RKO1TqNWeWcnwI+itz7QuWeKiOAVjKD6a7Ze23Uyi3F59e6RD2fgcM/dvNO2Im5MCj6d6epalkBy+pTNTd4oc2ZjzhD5KEy9/kvrLGUVXvDXwNrgaxYXsxXVoI2MdHGl/piJaIIjDKxuiU2ymrqL6q9Dz8= ; Message-ID: <20050713023659.25496.qmail@web31010.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 19:36:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Frederic Fouche Subject: Re: [MiNT] Re[3]: usage of wind_calc() To: MiNT List In-Reply-To: <42D4788C.1060600@yahoo.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1696686140-1121222218=:24886" X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: x130844@yahoo.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.3 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD, FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS, FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6, HTML_MESSAGE X-Spam-Level: **** --0-1696686140-1121222218=:24886 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Give me a good reason why a user still wanting to use new applications cr= eated in 2005, would deliberately want to use mint 1.1x? =20 This does not make any sense. =20 =20 Furthermore, If an application written in 1990 followed the atari GEM/A= ES/VDI standard as documented, XAAES, with no matter what changes and add= ition should still be able to run that application.=20 If new applications decide to take advantage of the new features offered = by Xaaes, by ALL means, it should be done and encouraged.=20 I have given up coding for GEM due to its idiocyncractic implementation a= nd overly cumbersome usage. Anything to help the developer to only conc= entrate on the main task will be a blessing, as opposed to always thinkin= g about, Oh, what about magic? how am i gonna do that? what if the user = is in 320x200? what if, what if. At the end, your code is 50% of bullshit= just to compensate for other OS that are just not up to task. Ever wonder why so many projects get started and never get finished on At= ari? =20 The only AES that's still being developed is XAAES, all the others have k= icked the bucket, so let's not worry about them. XAAES is the only thing = you can hang on to, let's make sure, it is pleasurable to developers and = in turn users.=20 =20 With an AES fitted to what's needed as of today, to match the current pla= tforms we have, to have good documentation and new good aes calls, will m= ake developers much more efficients, and with faster development turn aro= und, users will then benefit. =20 I'll tell you what asinine is; a user demanding to run the latest applica= tions (2005) on his 1985 hardware with an unsupported, not developed OS (= magic 6.x, mint 1.1x) =20 =20 Zorro wrote: Of course, we can't keep compatibility with very old OS but to support=20 MagiC 6.x and Mint 1.1x is the minimum because the majority of Atarians=20 use these OS. =09 --------------------------------- Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page=20 --0-1696686140-1121222218=:24886 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Give me a good reason why a user still wanting to use new applicatio= ns created in 2005, would deliberately want to use mint 1.1x?
 
This does not make any sense.
 
 
Furthermore,   If an application written in 1990 followed = the atari GEM/AES/VDI standard as documented, XAAES, with no matter what = changes and addition should still be able to run that application.
If new applications decide to take advantage of the new features off= ered by Xaaes, by ALL means, it should be done and encouraged.
I have given up coding for GEM due to its idiocyncractic implementat= ion and overly cumbersome usage.   Anything to help the develop= er to only concentrate on the main task will be a blessing, as opposed to= always thinking about,  Oh, what about magic? how am i gonna do tha= t? what if the user is in 320x200? what if, what if. At the end, your cod= e is 50% of bullshit just to compensate for other OS that are just not up= to task.
Ever wonder why so many projects get started and never get fini= shed on Atari?
 
The only AES that's still being developed is XAAES, all the others h= ave kicked the bucket, so let's not worry about them. XAAES is the only t= hing you can hang on to, let's make sure, it is pleasurable to developers= and in turn users.
 
With an AES fitted to what's needed as of today, to match the curren= t platforms we have, to have good documentation and new good ae= s calls, will make developers much more efficients, and with faster = development turn around, users will then benefit.
 
I'll tell you what asinine is; a user demanding to run the= latest applications (2005) on his 1985 hardware with an unsupp= orted, not developed OS (magic 6.x, mint 1.1x)
   
 
Zorro <zorro270@yahoo.fr> wrote:


Of course, we can't keep compatibility with very old OS but to sup= port
MagiC 6.x and Mint 1.1x is the minimum because the majority of A= tarians
use these OS.

Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page --0-1696686140-1121222218=:24886--