werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (08/26/86)
...just to avoid the impression that there is a lack of support for MacTutor, with all its glorious shortcomings - there isn't anything better, and it's difficult to imagine that there could be anything better for the money, given the specialized market. no reason not to improve (and I'm sure the MacTutor folks work hard on giving the best value they can), and no reason not to criticize (and I'm as likely to scream in agony as the next guy when I get bit by a bug), but let's not beat our best cow because she doesn't give more milk ... BTW, why don't Apple support such a valuable magazine with some paid columns directed to developers ???? I'd even be willing to stare at some hype-advertisements if it helps MacTutor to pay their bills and stay in business. Heck, the BCS-published magazine I just read had a 4-page glossy from IBM (among others) and I was not insulted nor worried that this would influence the coverage of IBM-products ...
stephenw@murdu.OZ (Stephen Withers) (08/28/86)
In article <843@ssc-vax.UUCP> arlo@ssc-vax.UUCP (Jim Campiche) writes: >I'll admit, though, MacTudor is >very inconsistant - one C article is written with Consulaire C, >the next article with Lightspeed or something. Let's standardize >and stick with it, please! Let's not! By using a variety of compilers, the magazine caters for a wider audience, and also gives the uncommitted some clues to the relative merits of the different products for their particular needs.
joel@gould9.UUCP (Joel West) (09/06/86)
In article <1161@murdu.OZ>, stephenw@murdu.OZ (Stephen Withers) writes: > In article <843@ssc-vax.UUCP> arlo@ssc-vax.UUCP (Jim Campiche) writes: > >I'll admit, though, MacTudor is > >very inconsistant - one C article is written with Consulaire C, > >the next article with Lightspeed or something. Let's standardize > >and stick with it, please! > > Let's not! By using a variety of compilers, the magazine caters for a > wider audience, and also gives the uncommitted some clues to the relative > merits of the different products for their particular needs. Besides, the real reason is that each author is an independent contractor and only has whatever compiler he (there are no she's) owns. The only real way around this would be for TML or Think or Aztec (etc.) to supply a free development system to each contributing editor who writes about the corresponding topic. For example, I couldn't use TML Pascal for the 9/86 article I wrote, because at the time, I didn't have MDS, and the project required some assembly language code. -- Joel West MCI Mail: 282-8879 Western Software Technology, POB 2733, Vista, CA 92083 {cbosgd, ihnp4, pyramid, sdcsvax, ucla-cs} !gould9!joel joel%gould9.uucp@NOSC.ARPA