Sander Zuidema wrote:
> I agree with Anne on this one.
> We MSX users were partly responsible for the failure of the MSX system.
> A lot of companes stopped developing software for MSX because of the low
> sales (because of excessive copying).
I honestly have my doubts about that. Of course, the excessive copying was
*a* reason, but I don't think it was *the* reason. *The* reason was that
over the years more commercially interesting platforms, like PC and all the
game consoles, appeared and MSX was getting out-dated and obsolete.
The lack of a proper successor to the MSX2 (*) and main hardware developers
bailing out was IMHO the main reason MSX died.
Besides, haven't you noticed the fact that there's a CD toaster in almost
every PC nowadays? Copying games and other software is as easy as
alt.crackz.com.
I don't see that stopping companies from writing software for the PC...
(*) No, I don't see MSX-2+ as a proper successor. The only improvement
being some more screen resolutions, which were a lot harder to program for,
and (*hurray*) horizontal scrolling. The turbo-R was a step in the right
direction, though... The most interesting development towards an MSX-3
I've seen sofar is the MSX380 project from Mr. Padial - but it's unfortunately
about 10 years too late...
> Some people adore Martos and are glad he's back in the MSX scene.
Is he?
> I can only say that I see people like Martos as
> a huge threat to the entire revival project.
I don't. The revival project is largely open source. How would you 'crack'
and illegaly copy open source. Plus, you assuming that Martos is still
interested in crackin & copying software...
Just my $200 (yes, I value my own opinion X-))
Eric
--
For info, see http://www.stack.nl/~wynke/MSX/listinfo.html
