wtm@neoucom.UUCP (Bill Mayhew) (05/12/89)
Apple's hyperbole re: System 7.0 is a quite useful stategy that Sculley has essentially learned from IBM. Basically the current flurry of press releases regarding System 7.0 are essentially announcemnts that Apple intends to at some future as yet unspicified date announce System 7.0. This remimds one of the protracted labor pains surrounding the IBM PS/2 equipment. System 7.0 t'aint goin ta be no panacea anyway. According to a blurb in this week's Infoworld magazine, "The driver tookit will let printer OEMs and software developers use the operating system's device-independent Quickdraw graphics engine to prepare page bit maps for printers. Driver developers will only need to write a chooser-level user interface and a hardware interface that deals with printer-specific communication." Translating: In other words, it is the same old thing. We all know how easy it is to write "a hardware interface that deals with printer-specific communication". I guess I ought to be able to knock that off with about ten minutes of coding :-). Like translating a quickdraw raster to HP-PCL, for instance. At least they are planning to give us hooks to do it right this time. According to PC Week, developers have the System 7.0 specification now, with beta releases of the O/S expected to be delivered in the third quarter of 1989. One might see 7.0 on dealer shelves by early 1990 if there are no big snags. Guaging from 6.0 and 6.1, I don't think it would be timely advice to start holding one's breath yet. At this august institution, we are none the less eagerly awaiting the arrival of 7.0. 32-bit quickdraw will be nice. Bill wtm@impulse.UUCP
limonce@pilot.njin.net (Tom Limoncelli) (05/13/89)
What we're seeing is the newest kind of marketing. Rumors! Yes, this
release will be read by enough people in the wrong places so as to
make them think that it's shipping. Take your average person that's
not 100% "into computers". They read the article and forget about it.
Three months later they recall "yeah, didn't the Mac do this fancy
feature?"
I am convinced of this now that I just got off the phone that argued
for almost an hour that the original Mac had color. I think it was
the logic that "any successful computer must be able to do color, duh,
right?"
I think that C-A should do a press release that in five years the
Amiga will be able to be completely driven by ESP. That way in three
months hordes of people will go out buying them because, "gosh, I
remember something about it and ESP... it must be GREAT!"
People still come to me asking why I don't run Lotus on my Amiga; they
don't believe me when I tell them that it's not IBM compatable. They
heard about the BridgeBoard when the A2000 was released and didn't
remember that it was an option. Of course, at the time they must have
thought that it was an option... but everyone would buy it right
anyway, eh? Ergo, they assume that I would have one. Recently the
owner of the computer store that I bought my Amiga 2000 from
exclaimed, "You mean you *don't* have a BridgeBoard?"
Ah, the common people (read: "Ah, the non-techies") :^)
--
Tom Limoncelli -- tlimonce@drunivac.Bitnet -- limonce@pilot.njin.net
Drew University -- Box 1060, Madison, NJ -- 201-408-5389
Standard Disclaimer: I am not the mouth-piece of Drew University