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_!