Changes

Thank you very much for sendingthe advance copy of the review of mybook, "Programs for the TI HomeComputer." The few passages in thereview that I question are outlinedbelow. 1. " ... the publishers pull a dirtytrick ... "-I agree, except that MYbook was published in February of1983 when other publishers thought Iwas crazy for doing a book of programsspecifically for the TI. 2. " ... quality ... ranges from very goodto poor." -I think the word "poor" is abit subjective. The author admits thatthe programming is not ''"poor'' " soperhaps he means that the particularprograms that did not appeal to him(ie. Ten-Up, Video Tape Finder, AirlineGuide) were uninteresting to him.I realized that the users of the 99/4Awere a diverse bunch, so I tried toinclude a wide variety of programs.Never did I expect all programs tothey truly are), a more fair statementmight be, "I did not find this game toappeal to all tastes. As a matt􀂩r matter offact, some of the programs in the bookthat were my least favorites haveturned out to be favored by manyreaders. It all depends on what thereader is looking for. For example,some may think that "Keyword ArticleSearch" is a useless program, but Ihave received many letters from userswho like it, and a review in PopularComputing devoted two paragraphs toit. The same review said that th􀂪 the educationalprograms in the book were"interesting and unusual," while Mr.Bobbitt seemed rather unimpressedby them. The point is, neither is"wrong"; the two reviewers merelyhave different tastes. So, instead ofsaying programs are "poor" (unlessbe very interesting." Or, "Some maynot find programs such as Video TapeFinder and Airline Guide to be particularlyuseful to them."