[comp.sys.apple] FSTs

SASQUATCH@ALBION.BITNET ("Kevin O. Lepard 629-5511 x6668", 517) (04/14/89)

Alan H. Stein (stein@uconnvm) writes:

> [stuff about mac programs to transfer files deleted]

>  In the meantime, where are our HFS and Dos 3.3 FSTs?

Or, for that matter, an FST for Mac disks and MS-DOS disks.  I _know_ that
the regular old Apple 3.5" disk drive can read and write on MSDOS disks,
our PC-Transporter does it.  It doesn't require the Apple Superdrive to
read and write MSDOS.  I am aware, by the way, that if you format an MSDOS
disk w/ the 3.5" drive that _some_, but not all, IBM 3.5" drives won't be
able to read it.  It would still be a _HUGE_ benefit just to be able to
read and write directly to/from MSDOS 3.5" disks.

Anyone at Apple know of any new FSTs coming down the line?  If so, what and
when?  (And please don't give me any "non-disclosure" stuff.  After all,
_everybody_ knew that GS/OS was coming out, and when, before it did.... :)

Kevin Lepard
Bitnet: Sasquatch@albion.bitnet
Disclaimer: These opinions do not necessarily represent those of Albion
College.

farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (04/14/89)

In article <8904132206.aa17333@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> SASQUATCH@ALBION.BITNET ("Kevin O. Lepard  629-5511 x6668", 517) writes:
>Alan H. Stein (stein@uconnvm) writes:
>
>> [stuff about mac programs to transfer files deleted]
>
>>  In the meantime, where are our HFS and Dos 3.3 FSTs?
>
>Or, for that matter, an FST for Mac disks and MS-DOS disks.  I _know_ that

	HFS is the filing system used on the Macintosh.	
	
>
>Anyone at Apple know of any new FSTs coming down the line?  If so, what and
>when?  (And please don't give me any "non-disclosure" stuff.  After all,
>_everybody_ knew that GS/OS was coming out, and when, before it did.... :)

	"non-disclosure" stuff follows:
		Whether you knew about GS/OS before it's release does not
		matter.  If we went around pre-announcing our products,
		it wouldn't be very wise, strategically or economically.
>
>Kevin Lepard
>Bitnet: Sasquatch@albion.bitnet
>Disclaimer: These opinions do not necessarily represent those of Albion
>College.

Cary Farrier


-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| This message does in no way reflect the views or opinions of   |
| any organization.  In fact, they illustrate just how           |
| disorganized things really are.                                |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+

nicholaA@moravian.EDU (04/15/89)

>
>Alan H. Stein (stein@uconnvm) writes:
>> [stuff about mac programs to transfer files deleted]
>>  In the meantime, where are our HFS and Dos 3.3 FSTs?

>Or, for that matter, an FST for Mac disks and MS-DOS disks.  I _know_ that
>the regular old Apple 3.5" disk drive can read and write on MSDOS disks,
>our PC-Transporter does it.  It doesn't require the Apple Superdrive to
>read and write MSDOS.  I am aware, by the way, that if you format an MSDOS
>disk w/ the 3.5" drive that _some_, but not all, IBM 3.5" drives won't be
>able to read it.  It would still be a _HUGE_ benefit just to be able to
>read and write directly to/from MSDOS 3.5" disks.

Ok, first, an HFS FST would allow you to read and write to Mac disks.  HFS
stands for (H)ierarchical (F)ile (S)ystem, and it's what the mac currently
uses to store its files...

Second, no, your Apple 3.5" drive cannot read MS-DOS disks without the proper
controlling circuitry -- ie, you'll _need_ a Pc Transporter to read an MS-DOS
disk.  The port on the back of a "regular" GS just doesn't cut it.

And, quite frankly, I would rather see Apple's resources going into something
like the HFS FST which everyone can use rather than an MS-DOS FST for the PcT
which only a few can people can use.

>Anyone at Apple know of any new FSTs coming down the line?  If so, what and
>when?  (And please don't give me any "non-disclosure" stuff.  After all,
>_everybody_ knew that GS/OS was coming out, and when, before it did.... :)

Almost everyone at Apple _always_ knows what's coming down the line, but they
cannot, and in most cases, WILL NOT tell you.  Why can't you just accept that
Apple is not in the business of rumor-mongering its own projects?

>Kevin Lepard

andy

----
Andy Nicholas                     CsNET: shrinkit@moravian.edu
Box 435, Moravian College      InterNET: shrinkit%moravian.edu@relay.cs.net 
Bethlehem, PA  18018               uucp: rutgers!lafcol!lehi3b15!mc70!shrinkit
----                           ALink PE: shrinkit

SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) (04/16/89)

>        Whether you knew about GS/OS before it's release does not
>        matter.  If we went around pre-announcing our products,
>        it wouldn't be very wise, strategically or economically.

Like most sweeping generalizations, the above isn't true.  In
fact, senior Apple executives are frequently quoted on the subject of
Apple's plans (the true multitasking operating system for the Mac II
<with MMU>, Mac IIx, IIcx, and SE-030 by the end of this year, for
example).

It's imprudent to discuss future products if the effect is customers
deferring purchase of current products, or products with release dates
so far in the future that their failure to appear after awhile might be
viewed as a sign of trouble (the LapMac perhaps?).  But it's not so smart
when the opposite is likely to be the case.

Since when has Apple ceased "pre-announcing" products (the LapMac, isn't
pre-announced)?  Apple is busy rumor mongering all sorts of future Macintosh
stuff (the Macintosh "tower" - a buck says that it WILL BE the IItx - the
25 MHz IIcx and SE-030, etc.); why the haughty "my lips are sealed" about
anything to do with the Apple II?  If you ARE planning (working on) an FST
for Mac disks, that probably would ENCOURAGE purchases or upgrades.  If the
rumored MacCard is for real, some heavy hinting would be both economically
AND strategically smart.

Murph Sewall                       Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90]
Prof. of Marketing     Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET
Business School        sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu          [INTERNET]
U of Connecticut       {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL     [UUCP]
           (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM]

-+- I don't speak for my employer, though I frequently wish that I could
            (subject to change without notice; void where prohibited)

farrier@Apple.COM (Cary Farrier) (04/17/89)

In article <8904160156.aa25830@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> SEWALL@UCONNVM.BITNET (Murph Sewall) writes:
>>        Whether you knew about GS/OS before it's release does not
>>        matter.  If we went around pre-announcing our products,
>>        it wouldn't be very wise, strategically or economically.
>
>Like most sweeping generalizations, the above isn't true.  In
>fact, senior Apple executives are frequently quoted on the subject of
>Apple's plans 

	When the executives disclose publicly any plans or products,
	that is called announcing a product.  When the engineers disclose
	the same, it is called an information leak.  
 
>It's imprudent to discuss future products if the effect is customers
>deferring purchase of current products, or products with release dates
>so far in the future that their failure to appear after awhile might be
>viewed as a sign of trouble (the LapMac perhaps?).  But it's not so smart
>when the opposite is likely to be the case.

	Not so.  You have left out two facts: A) We have competitors,
	and B) If you pre-announce a product (read leak information) then
	don't deliver on it, you can stir up many bad feelings from the
	consumer.

>Since when has Apple ceased "pre-announcing" products (the LapMac, isn't
>pre-announced)? 
	
	Since when has Apple started?  The "LapMac" as you call it, was not
	announced.  If you recall, the report on it in the unnamed news
	journal was based on information they received from a technical
	document stolen from Apple.

>Murph Sewall                       Vaporware? ---> [Gary Larson returns 1/1/90]
>Prof. of Marketing     Sewall@UConnVM.BITNET
>Business School        sewall%uconnvm.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu          [INTERNET]
>U of Connecticut       {psuvax1 or mcvax }!UCONNVM.BITNET!SEWALL     [UUCP]
>           (203) 486-5246 [FAX] (203) 486-2489 [PHONE] 41 49N 72 15W [ICBM]

Cary Farrier

-- 
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| This message does in no way reflect the views or opinions of   |
| any organization.  In fact, they illustrate just how           |
| disorganized things really are.                                |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+