Re: ANN: Retiring from A2 world - Good Bye All!

["Paul Grammens" <grammens@svn.net>]

"Gary R. Utter" <utter@syndicomm.com> wrote
>
> There was a time, a decade ago, when you could make a living, not a
> million dollars, just a LIVING, selling Apple II software. But it's
> kind of hard to SELL software when Turley has posted a sector edited
> copy of your beta to the web before the program is ever released.
>

Well, if one person can wipe you out that way, you're in the wrong business.
As you note, that was a decade ago anyway. That's the point. You're crying
over milk spilt a decade ago. Get over it.


> But of course, since that was before your time, you'll insist that it
> didn't happen.
>

I think I've been pretty clear about the obvious point of not knowing what
happened in days of yore. I'm not insisting that it didn't happen, I'm
suggesting that even if it did, you should get a life.

Turley, and his One
> World Software Wizards had done such serious damage to the market that
> there was no point in hanging around.
>

I'm sorry, but the reality is that Apple stopped making the Apple II. Some
time before that, it was in decline. Making Tom a scapegoat for that is
ridiculous. Did he kill off the Atari's, Amigas, and TRS-80's too?


> You just have no idea of the good people we lost because of Turley.
> Turley didn't kill the Apple II single handed. But he screwed it up for
> a LOT of people, a lot more people than he ever helped. And he screwed
> it up less by piracy, in and of itself, than by the climate of hate
> that was created pretty much entirely by him and his minions.
>

Anyone who was trying to make money on Apple II software was going to fail,
Tom or no Tom.
Most programmers moved on to other platforms. It's a no-brainer. It's a
hobbiest platform now.

> The REAL motivation for the anti-piracy fanaticism in the Apple II
> world is that it is anti Turley. He went out of his way to piss people
> off, and this is the result.
>
> The man has mental problems, has had as long as he has been around, and
> is probably largely not responsible for his actions. But that doesn't
> make his actions any less lethal.

I can believe all that, except for the lethal part. I think he enjoys the
attention. But he had very little to do with the economics of programming
for the Apple II.
-Paul