AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS.BITNET ("David A. Lyons") (07/31/88)
>Date: Wed, 20 Jul 88 14:19:00 N >In reply to: DEFFER%CGEUGE51.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Eric DEFFERARD) >Subject: Re: Re: If GS meant business... [The following will probably sound like I disagree with almost everything Eric said; actually, the parts I agreed with (& therefore had no comment on) are omitted.] >My own "business logic" tells me that those "new functionalities" >don't have anything to do anymore with the apple 2 (because apple 2 >e,c owners will NOT benefit, directly or indirectly, of anything >developed around these new functionalities), and worse, they don't >even make the GS compatible with the Mac. So, what does Apple end up >with ? The logical step is that they end up with a new product line >and which, as such, needs it's own tech support team, engineering >team, and software team and all that costs a lot. //e|//c owners will benefit (probably only slightly) from new packages developed for ProDOS 8, even if they have more features when used on a IIgs. If the IIgs couldn't run //e|//c software, even more development attention would be taken away from the //e|//c and directed toward the IIgs. (For example, I probably would have stopped working on Davex long ago if it didn't work on the IIgs; but many net readers will confirm that Davex is useful and runs across the whole ProDOS Apple II line, from II+ to IIgs.) >Furthermore, my opinion is that today computer manufacturers try to >merge their different product lines (or at least make them software >compatible) to reduce the costs inherent to support. But you just finished pointing out that Apple *isn't* mergine the Apple II and Mac lines. Are you saying they *should*? (A strict reading of that last quote leads to the conclusion that Apple isn't a computer manufacturer.) >You say it's because there's a market ? Yeah sure, people who can't >afford Macs, but don't want to spend their money for an Apple 2e People who want to step up to something more powerful than their older Apple IIs withOUT trashing the bulk of their investment in Apple II hardware and software. People who can't afford a Sun workstation but don't want to spend their money for a wristwatch calculator. (I'm not sure what this means, but then I'm not sure what yours means either. The various macs, the IIgs, and the older IIs are all different machines.) >(I understand they don't want to buy something I call crap nowadays) >(I know, I don't have a heart :-) ), but still want to buy an Apple >computer. I have no idea whether you have a heart, but I'm disturbed if you mean to imply that the //e *is* crap, that we all quietly know it, and that you're risking offending someone by saying it out loud. The //e is *not* crap in my opinion; you're welcome to your own opinion. >[...] I'm not asking Apple to give away computers, just asking them >to provide facilities to people who are interested in making the GS a >popular system, the consequence being an increase of sales. The Apple >2 became quickly popular because lots of people started writing >specific applications for it, not just word processors and >spreadsheets. And most of these people weren't certified developers, >yet received a minimum information on how things worked when they >bought their computer. You don't have to be a certified developer to get information. You can get the reference books from Addison-Wesley (the draft versions were available through APDA); you can get technotes from APDA or maybe from your local user group (or less reliably from the commercial services like CIS and GEnie). Sample source code is available in the Demo Sampler from APDA; and other sample source is included with both TML Pascal and ORCA/Pascal, and probably with other languages. The problem is there is a *lot* more information to get these days; the IIgs is a much more complex system than the II+ was. Applications are responsible for interacting with the system in numerous ways rather than doing everything themselves. There are more rules to follow and more ways to do things wrong & jeopardize compatibility with future software and hardware developments. >How many specific GS programs are actually on the market ? (lemme >guess, uh 50 ? with about 50% games ?) 50 programs in 2 years ?????? >hum, seems like the gs ain't really attracting software >development. I think your figure is way low. I will check & let you know. >Why ? is the GS hard to program ? are there performance, graphics, >memory problems ? do programmers (amateur and professional) have the >tools to develop software ? Yes, the GS is hard to program compared to simpler systems. There are certainly performance problems; often they can be worked around nicely by talented developers, but unfortunately it doesn't always end up that way. I don't know what you mean by graphics problems and memory problems. QuickDraw and the Memory Manager work very smoothly provided they are used correctly. Programmers probably do not have all the tools they would *like*; but yes, both amateurs and professionals have access to the tools they *need* through APDA or various 3rd parties. >>Keep in mind that Apple is most likely working on a lot of stuff for >>the IIgs that we don't KNOW about. Think about all the rumors you've >>heard--some of them are probably based in fact. There's a lot more >>going on than tech-support. >David, rumors are just what they are: rumors, until some Apple >official officially declares: "We are working on an enhanced version >of the 2gs". Rumors are not "just" rumors. They are things that are either correct or incorrect (or partly correct). I leave it to you to decide how many varied rumors it takes before you can read through to some underlying reality. >Yeah, and Claris just bought Nashoba, which developed Filemaker (a >Mac database program) because they didn't have enough Mac >programmers. You gotta be kidding. Claris is just doing business the >easy way with $$$ and Sculley's blessing. Can you suggest a better source of talented programmers than a company like Styleware? I'm not into corporate politics (& I intend to stay that way). It doesn't bother me to know that the Styleware people will be writing for Claris. >Oh, by the way, did you know that Claris is now in direct competition >with Microsoft and Lotus corp. for the title of biggest software >development company ? Nope, it's news to me. [Looks like some of my sarcasm is starting to rub off? :-) ] >Eric DEFFERARD >BITNET DEFFER@CGEUGE51 >UUCP mcvax!cernvax!cui!deffer --David A. Lyons a.k.a. DAL Systems PO Box 287 | North Liberty, IA 52317 BITNET: AWCTTYPA@UIAMVS CompuServe: 72177,3233 GEnie mail: D.LYONS2