RR> On page 124 of the manual, they advertise a NeoDesk
RR> Developer's kit for experienced 'C' programmers familiar with
RR> desk accessories and pointers.  What is your opinion of this
RR> package?  Am I to understand this allows writing of stand
RR> alone programs that utilize NeoDesk like routines, or is this
RR> specifically for writing prorams that run on top of NeoDesk.
  
It is for both purposes. It certainly gives an deep insight into how
Dan and Rick conceived the development of NeoDesk, where problems
developed because of unforseeable future needs, and so on. It is
also reputed to be a terrific programmer's tool. Contact Gribnif
directly, by phone. Dan will give you the most factual answers.
   
HC> unbridled glee. My own distributed products (SARA software,
HC> lately), have been illegaly spread around with unbridled glee.
HC> ANYTHING that I can do to lay my hands on the little shits
HC> that steal my software . . . I WILL DO! If 'anything', includes
   
RR> Well, I just don't think it is realistic that you will ever
RR> get your hands on any of them.  Better to just accept that it
RR> will happen, and go on with business and try to enhance
RR> legitimate sales.  The way I figure it, the more effort you
RR> pour into fighting copiers, the less energy you have to
RR> provide good customer support.
   
I've already caught a couple (they were *very* surprised that anyone
would take the time to hunt 'em down). Quite frankly, I am a
johnny-come-lately to the retail, Atari business; it is certainly
not my main business. If it was my main business, I would have
starved to death long ago.
  
Your comment about customer support might be appropriate in some
other milieu. In the TOS/GEM marketplace however, the comment is
somewhat inaccurate. How does one enhance legitimate sales, Rodney?
Certainly not via conventional means. While my (Current Notes)
partner and I provide a viable advertising vehicle for TOS/GEM
developers and retailers, the vast majority of TOS/GEM users are
exceedingly hard to reach: the vast majority are not online, the
vast majority do not attend shows, and the vast majority still own
TOS 1.0 to TOS 1.04 machines. No sane developer or retailer believes
(even for a split nanosecond!), that the early-TOS market hasn't
been dead for well over two years. There is only so much in any
piece of software that can be updated, for pete's sake. Sooner or
later, products reach the natural end of their development life. The
greatest number of demands made of developers (by far), are directly
related to software enhancements that will take advantage of faster
processor power, more powerful operating systems, better sound and
better video. Developers cannot do all of these things, and not
utter some 'threat', or impose some restrictions on the
dissemination of their work.
  
RR> Your sense of justice might be burned a little, but I think
RR> the philosophical approach is needed - it will happen no
RR> matter what, no matter how much you scream, no matter what you
RR> do.  Don't drive yourself nuts over something you can't stop.
   
My sense of justice is both mature and well-founded. My philosophy
is publicly known. While public remonstrations may have little
effect on the most deleterious market forces (where we TOS/GEM users
are concerned), it is nonetheless important that we all remain
vigilant. Every theft, every copyright violation, every breach of
the rules, affects all of us; especially in our small TOS/GEM
marketplace. Rest assured however . . . going nuts isn't a
possiblity. =%D aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
  
RR> I'm no expert, but I think the trick is to keep offering
RR> registered users updates (for a small price) that will help
RR> finance more updates.
  
And what constitutes a 'small price'? $5? $10? $20? There are no
TOS/GEM developers who boast customer databases representing tens of
thousands of people. I cannot speak with genuine accuracy about most
of them, but I can assure you that the number of developers who have
large databases, can be counted on the fingers of one hand. By what
feat of mathematical genius can such numbers possibly translate into
a financial base that would permit the development of more updates.
For a *tiny* number of applications, such an approach might be
equitable - indeed, such an approach is already in place. But for
the vast majority of developers, such an approach is tantamount to
outright suicide. 
  
The vast majority of developers cannot be expected to provide
endless support to a widely scattered market, which they have no
means of reaching in the first place. It is the market which
dictates the viability of a product. If the product is good, well
supported, and *useful*, it will succeed under normal circumstances.
But if the circumstances become so onerous that even the simple act
of advertising the existence of upgrades becomes an impossibility,
how can such a product be maintained? If theft and piracy and
general copyright violation are stirred into the mixture, how can
anyone question the efficacy of *any* attempt by legitimate authors,

[ Length Exceeded - Message Split by Mountain Reader II ]
--- FiFo V2.1o [IOSmail 0.89]

[+/74 of 200/108 Mins] = * FIDO: ST_PROG =: Next...