Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!cit-vax!elroy!mahendo!jplgodo!wlbr!scgvaxd!ashtate!dbase!drc
From: drc@dbase.UUCP (Dennis Cohen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: 2 megs and LSC kiss of death
Message-ID: <379@dbase.UUCP>
Date: 20 Jun 88 16:10:44 GMT
References: <16044@uunet.UU.NET>
Organization: Ashton Tate Development Center Glendale Cal.
Lines: 34

In article <16044@uunet.UU.NET>, mo@uunet.UU.NET (Mike O'Dell) writes:
> THINK's PASCAL system has a source-code debugger in 1 megabyte.
> How come their C system can't manage that? 
Maybe because they want their C system to work properly under MultiFinder and
future system releases (something the Pascal product does NOT do, as a matter of
fact it still has some minor problems with the Mac II (although nothing
critical)).

> 
> I predict that the 2 meg requirement will significantly impact
> THINK's market share, particularly if BORLAND introduces their
> source-code debugger and manages to keep it within 1 meg.
I still don't see how a Pascal system with a debugger will impact the C product.If anything, I believe that we've seen that most people who use C won't dirty
their hands using a Pascal compiler and vice versa (religion rears its ugly
head).

> 
> THINK could well be cutting their own throats.
> I know I can't currently afford to pay $500/megabyte to
> upgrade my machine, so I am thinking seriously of moving
> my product plans back to the MessyDOS world where I can get
> most of the development advantages without the grief.
>  
I don't believe that it's 500/MB if you are upgrading a Plus or SE to 2MB due
to the availability of the 1+1 type clipon upgrades (they use 256K SIMMs and
can be had for about $300-350.  If you're talking about a Mac II, the upgrade
to 2MB is also in that range and anyone who has a 1MB Mac II is, in my opinion,
a masochist.

Dennis Cohen
Ashton-Tate Macintosh Division
dBASE Mac Development Team
--------------------------
Disclaimer:  Any opinions expressed above are _MINE_!