mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (04/20/89)
In article <23349@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, lauac@mead.qal.berkeley.edu (Alexander Lau) writes: > >1. There will be a System 6.0.4 (at least that is the number that I heard) > > that will include one of the features that was wanted for System 7.0. > System 6.0.4, my rumor source says, is for the upcoming 25 MHz Macs that > will be announced at the Fall MacWorld. The feature that Michael > mentions is probably the new QuickDraw outline font capability. It is > running far behind schedule; just turned alpha, and crashes often. My > source says that Apple is so desperate to get 6.0.4 out, they've pulled > people from the System 7.0 project to work on 6.0.4. Which leads to... Hmm... That's not the feature that I heard about (although that could be another lesser feature :-)... > >2. System 7.0 will be out near the end of the year; it will be officially > > announced at the Fall MacWorld. > A "features list" will be available at the Boston MacWorld, but I doubt > anything beyond a carefully guarded alpha release will be shown. Apparently, the team working on System 7.0 is having to go to great pains to ensure compatibility with earlier Macs, causing the development to be very slow... There is also a scary rumor about ROM upgrades... > >3. The Macintosh portable is moving along at a good pace, but probably will > > not be announced until late in the year. The features of this machine > I don't know what you're expecting, but I hear it's not coming out for > quite a while. Apple's main attention will be focused on getting the > 25 MHz machines out the door by the August MacWorld, but they don't > even expect to make that deadline. The portable is being demonstrated to the "elites" now from what I hear. The optomistic shipping predictions are giving an early December shipping date (although I don't know if that will be realistic). In this week's Computer- World, they listed the price at $3000, which I think is wishful thinking... They also said that the portable will weigh in at about 16 pounds (I heard 15, but that extra pound might be the internal 40MB hard disk :-). > ...Cheapest ever. Rumor is that Apple is > trying to clear its stockpiles of Mac Plusses, and they'll drop the > consumer list price of it Real Soon Now. From what ComputerWorld said this week, Apple is clearing inventories on both the Mac Plus and the Mac II (in order to ramp up production on the IIcx, apparently). In this case, I really doubt their accuracy (what do they know about Macs anyway :-). > --- Alex -Michael -- Michael Niehaus UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com)
sho@pur-phy (Sho Kuwamoto) (04/20/89)
In article <23349@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> lauac@mead.qal.berkeley.edu (Alexander Lau) writes: >System 6.0.4, my rumor source says, is for the upcoming 25 MHz Macs that >will be announced at the Fall MacWorld. The feature that Michael >mentions is probably the new QuickDraw outline font capability. It is >running far behind schedule; just turned alpha, and crashes often. Wow. Sounds cool. But they *are* keeping bitmap fonts around too, right? I'd hate to see what an outline generated 9 point font would look like. Still, I definitely think this is the way to go for large fonts, and it should be helpful for those who have the Imagewriter LQ or the Laserwriter SC. Not to mention that the screen images of headline type text will look nice. Hopefully, outline fonts means text at arbitrary rotation.... -Sho
mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (04/21/89)
> In article <6842@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> I write: >Well, here are the latest rumors that I have heard: Today I received a letter from an Apple employee commenting about this posting. He expressed displeasure with the content of my posting, and reminded me that I am under a non-disclosure contract with Apple. Just to prove to him that I have read it, here are the major points: 1. CONSULTANT shall not...divulge to any unauthorized person any information designated as confidential by Apple. 2. The restrictions shall not apply to information which (a) is known to CONSULTANT at the time of disclosure to CONSULTANT by APPLE, (b) has become publicly known through no wrongful act of CONSULTANT, (c) has been right- fully received from a third party without restriction on disclosure and without breach of the Agreement, (d) has been independently developed by CONSULTANT, (e) has been approved for release by written authorization of APPLE, (f) has been furnished by APPLE to a third party without a similar restriction on disclosure, or (g) has been disclosed pursuant to a requirement of law. Most all rumors that I have heard have come from one of several trade publica- tions, including ComputerWorld, MacWEEK, Macworld, MacUser, various user's group newsletters, and correspondence on the Usenet with other non-Apple employees. This type of information falls under categories (b) and (c) generally. Let me apologize if I released anything that may hold to be true in the future. In the future, I will go out of my way to credit sources of my information, so if you don't want your name associated with the information, don't even bother sending it to me. Just to prove that I intend on continuing to provide reports to the network, the message following this will include some more... -Michael "I can never win" Niehaus -- Michael Niehaus UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com)
mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (04/21/89)
> System 6.0.4, my rumor source says, is for the upcoming 25 MHz Macs that > will be announced at the Fall MacWorld. The feature that Michael > mentions is probably the new QuickDraw outline font capability... This week's MacWEEK talks about the outline font feature, but does not say what version of the system software this would be released with. It is possible that it could be postponed... > The new price list is here already at Berkeley, and the price for a > Mac Plus is $917 plus tax. Cheapest ever. Rumor is that Apple is > trying to clear its stockpiles of Mac Plusses, and they'll drop the > consumer list price of it Real Soon Now. ComputerWorld holds this same view for both the Mac Plus and the Mac II. They believe that on one will buy a Plus because it is not expandable/ upgradable. They believe that no one will buy an 020 machine with the risk of Apple standardizing on the 030. > I wish Berkeley's Apple Student Rep was as "on the ball" as you... :-) "On the Ball" -- Would you be suprised if I told you that this was the name of our clothing annex to our university bookstore? They sell large quantities of "Ball U" clothing... > --- Alex Some other interesting information from this week's MacWEEK: June 7 is slated as a "networking/connectivity" day for announcements. Those products scheduled to be introduced are: AppleTalk 2.0, a Token Ring card, and Apple's internet router for AppleTalk networks. AppleTalk 2.0 is supposed to support up to 65,034 (or some strange number like that) nodes by the use of logical zones. Apple's Token Ring card will be playing "catch-up" to IBM's new, faster TR offering. Apple is seriously considering building the Ethernet ciruitry into the motherboard of upcoming machines. Security at one of Apple's development centers has recently been increased. The rumors say that the theft of one of Apple's prototypes for an upcoming model of the Macintosh is the cause. MacWEEK also claimed that work on the new 25MHz and 33Mhz versions of the Mac IIx has progressed faster than expected, with working prototypes already in existence. [Disclaimer: none of this information is received from Apple. Most is from MacWEEK except where noted (or obvious).] -Michael -- Michael Niehaus UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com)
russotto@wam.UMD.EDU (04/21/89)
In article <6878@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes: >> In article <6842@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> I write: >>Well, here are the latest rumors that I have heard: > >Today I received a letter from an Apple employee commenting about this >posting. He expressed displeasure with the content of my posting, and reminded >me that I am under a non-disclosure contract with Apple. Just to prove to him >that I have read it, here are the major points: [deleted] > >-- >Michael Niehaus UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas >Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu >Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com) Keep telling us when they complain-- then we will know when you (or your sources) hit the mark! -- DISCLAIMER: Not only does the University not share my opinions, they don't want me sharing my opinions. "This 'Pnews', what does it do?" Matthew T. Russotto russotto@wam.umd.edu
holland@m2.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander) (04/22/89)
In article <6878@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes: >> In article <6842@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> I write: >>Well, here are the latest rumors that I have heard: > >Today I received a letter from an Apple employee commenting about this >posting. He expressed displeasure with the content of my posting, and reminded >me that I am under a non-disclosure contract with Apple. Just to prove to him >that I have read it, here are the major points: > >1. CONSULTANT shall not...divulge to any unauthorized person any information > designated as confidential by Apple. >2. The restrictions shall not apply to information which (a) is known to > CONSULTANT at the time of disclosure to CONSULTANT by APPLE, (b) has become > publicly known through no wrongful act of CONSULTANT, (c) has been right- >Most all rumors that I have heard have come from one of several trade publica- >tions, including ComputerWorld, MacWEEK, Macworld, MacUser, various user's >group newsletters, and correspondence on the Usenet with other non-Apple >employees. This type of information falls under categories (b) and (c) >generally. > I don't know all the details here, so this may not be totally appropriate. In general you need to be careful discussing confidential or proprietary information even if it is discussed in public. If it appears in an unofficial discussion or article (such as a rumors column), it is not yet "public information" as in 2.b. If you discuss this information after appearing in a rumors column, then you are endorsing it, making it an official announcement. Before it qualifies as public information, there must be an official public release. I've know cases where confidential information appeared in sources such as Aviation Week. But, the information remained confidential! It's an uncomfortable feeling when everyone else can discuss something that you know about, but you need to be quiet because it's "confidential". Fred Hollander Computer Science Center Texas Instruments, Inc. hollander@ti.com The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.
bmug@garnet.berkeley.edu (BMUG) (04/22/89)
In article <2160@pur-phy> sho@newton.physics.purdue.edu.UUCP (Sho Kuwamoto) writes: > (stuff deleted) >Wow. Sounds cool. But they *are* keeping bitmap fonts around too, right? >I'd hate to see what an outline generated 9 point font would look like. (more stuff deleted) An outline generated 9 point font could certainly look pretty bad on a 72-dpi monitor. Suppose you display it on a monitor at, say, 100 dpi, though, and decent contrast and resolution? Apple needs to address a lot of the 72-dpi limitations of QuickDraw if they're to take advantage of higher-res graphic display monitors and achieve true device independence (as PostScript is capable of doing). Obviously this would be a very high-priority item on the future features checklist... John Heckendorn /\ BMUG ARPA: bmug@garnet.berkeley.EDU A__A 1442A Walnut St., #62 BITNET: bmug@ucbgarnet |()| Berkeley, CA 94709 | | (415) 549-2684 | |
mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) (04/22/89)
Well, the jury has returned a verdict, and I have been found guilty as charged.
I hereby yield to those who have been burying me in mail for the past two
days: I will no longer spread any more rumors about Apple. So please, stop
sending messages. You win; I give up.
I will not spread rumors, I will not spread rumors, I will not spread rumors...
-Michael
p.s. For my penance, I will watch 24 hours of John Sculley videotapes :-)
[And if it matters, yes, I am Catholic.]
--
Michael Niehaus UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!mithomas
Apple Student Rep ARPA: mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu
Ball State University AppleLink: ST0374 (from UUCP: st0374@applelink.apple.com)ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (04/22/89)
In article <23442@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, bmug@garnet.berkeley.edu (BMUG) writes... [...] > >Apple needs to address a lot of the 72-dpi limitations of QuickDraw >if they're to take advantage of higher-res graphic display monitors >and achieve true device independence (as PostScript is capable of >doing). Obviously this would be a very high-priority item on the >future features checklist... Well, I don't know how high a priority it is (but I, too, _hope_ it's a high one), but Apple is working on a QuickDraw replacement, which -- from all I've heard -- will be device-independent. Basically that's supposed to be the reason they didn't go with Display PostScript. It's supposedly called "NuGraf" or something like that. I hope to see it soon. :-> Robert ------ ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu ------ generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine
roy@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (John M.A. Roy) (04/22/89)
In article <75461@ti-csl.csc.ti.com>, holland@m2 (Fred Hollander) writes: |In article <6878@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes: |>> In article <6842@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> I write: |>>Well, here are the latest rumors that I have heard: |> |>Today I received a letter from an Apple employee commenting about this |>posting. He expressed displeasure with the content of my posting, and reminded |>me that I am under a non-disclosure contract with Apple. Just to prove to him |>that I have read it, here are the major points: |> |>1. CONSULTANT shall not...divulge to any unauthorized person any information |> designated as confidential by Apple. |>2. The restrictions shall not apply to information which (a) is known to |> CONSULTANT at the time of disclosure to CONSULTANT by APPLE, (b) has become |> publicly known through no wrongful act of CONSULTANT, (c) has been right- | |>Most all rumors that I have heard have come from one of several trade publica- |>tions, including ComputerWorld, MacWEEK, Macworld, MacUser, various user's |>group newsletters, and correspondence on the Usenet with other non-Apple |>employees. This type of information falls under categories (b) and (c) |>generally. |> | |I don't know all the details here, so this may not be totally |appropriate. In general you need to be careful discussing |confidential or proprietary information even if it is discussed in |public. If it appears in an unofficial discussion or article (such as |a rumors column), it is not yet "public information" as in 2.b. If |you discuss this information after appearing in a rumors column, then |you are endorsing it, making it an official announcement. Before it |qualifies as public information, there must be an official public |release. | |I've know cases where confidential information appeared in sources |such as Aviation Week. But, the information remained confidential! |It's an uncomfortable feeling when everyone else can discuss something |that you know about, but you need to be quiet because it's |"confidential". | |Fred Hollander |Computer Science Center |Texas Instruments, Inc. |hollander@ti.com | |The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments. There is an old tenent in business: "Don't sign a contract with someone you can't trust." This is because NO contract is completely clear in all cases, so you must TRUST that the other party will do what is fair in unclear or ambiguous situations. Unfortunately, most of us do not deal with people (which can be trusted or not), but must deal with companies (which change personnel and policies so much that they cannot be trusted). So when you sign a non-disclosure agreement try to make personal contact with a human and agree with them to be TRUSTWORTHY. If some time in the future, someone else jumps in to say that you have violated the agreement and you feel that you have not violated the original agreement, tell them you are sorry that they feel that way. Inform them that you did not enter into an agreement with them, but with someone else and that they should discuss it with the original signer. I usually leave open the door to further discussions, but it usually isn't worth the time to talk with people like that (particularly public relations people), unless they wish to PAY for your time or are going to sue. These are my opionions based upon my experiences as a consultant and engineer: no disclaimer is necessary. I'm a person, not a company, you can trust me or not. P.S. "Confidential" is a governement security level and represents a totally new ballgame (They WILL get you.). "Company Private" is the correct term. Any information that should be controlled, needs to be marked as such (usually with a stamp); otherwise it is open to judgement as to the sensitivity of the information. John M.A. Roy (714) 856-5039 ICS Dept., Univ. Calif., Irvine CA 92714 Internet: roy@ics.uci.edu
sho@pur-phy (Sho Kuwamoto) (04/23/89)
In article <6892@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> mithomas@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Michael Thomas Niehaus) writes: >I hereby yield to those who have been burying me in mail for the past two >days: I will no longer spread any more rumors about Apple. So please, stop >sending messages. You win; I give up. Depends on where you get your info, I guess. If there's no legal deal, I don't see why anyone on the net shouldn't talk about rumors, as long as they are clearly labeled as such. I, for one, enjoy seeing rumors on the net. Is there any good reason why he shouldn't post? I'm only asking this for the sake of personal enlightenment. For all I know, there might actually be a good reason. So, if worst comes to worst, maybe you can spread these rumors to other people on the net to post. Or maybe we could start a mac rumors list.... Uh. -Sho
mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (04/24/89)
I doubt if the net is the best place to initiate rumors. Since the best rumors come from people in the know, and the people who let them know might not like them letting the public in on information which would benefit the public (as opposed to keeping the public in the dark, which seems be the desire of large companies), the in-people should send anonymous messages to various magazines that publish rumor columns, and are likely to be able to keep their mouths shut.
rrw@naucse.UUCP (Robert Wier) (04/25/89)
In article <46100297@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>, mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > > be the desire of large companies), the in-people should send anonymous > messages to various magazines that publish rumor columns, and are > likely to be able to keep their mouths shut. The problem with this is that the lead times on magazine publishing is so great that by the time they come out, the rumors have either been disproven or become old news. The BEST place I've seen to pick up on stuff is in MacWeek... For example, I am very interested in the fast cpu Mac IIcx. Variously, I've heard this called the IIcxe or the IIce. At any rate, if the 68030 in it really runs at 25 or 33 Mhz, does this imply that it will have 80 ns memory? Or will it just do a bunch of cacheing? If it requires memory that fast, it will probably be out of our budget bounds... - Bob Wier College of Engineering Flagstaff, Arizona Northern Arizona University ...arizona!naucse!rrw | BITNET: WIER@NAUVAX | *usual disclaimers*
holland@m2.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander) (04/25/89)
In article <1371@naucse.UUCP> rrw@naucse.UUCP (Robert Wier) writes: >In article <46100297@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu>, mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: >> >> be the desire of large companies), the in-people should send anonymous >> messages to various magazines that publish rumor columns, and are >> likely to be able to keep their mouths shut. > > The problem with this is that the lead times on magazine publishing > is so great that by the time they come out, the rumors have either > been disproven or become old news. The BEST place I've seen to pick > up on stuff is in MacWeek... I just got my first issue of MacGuide yesterday. It has a *sneak preview* of the Mac IIcx! Fred Hollander Computer Science Center Texas Instruments, Inc. hollander@ti.com The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.
sho@pur-phy (Sho Kuwamoto) (04/25/89)
In article <46100297@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes:
<I doubt if the net is the best place to initiate rumors. Since the
<best rumors come from people in the know, and the people who let them know
<might not like them letting the public in on information which would
<benefit the public (as opposed to keeping the public in the dark, which seems
<be the desire of large companies), the in-people should send anonymous
<messages to various magazines that publish rumor columns, and are
<likely to be able to keep their mouths shut.
If netters at large are not morally opposed to such rumor colums in
magazines (a big if, I'll grant you) would it be feasible to have a
rumor moderator to send stuff to who vows to keep stuff strictly
confidential? I suppose there would be a problem if the moderator
can't be trusted, since he would know where the original articles came
from, but maybe that could also be avoided. Is there a way to set up
an FTP server which allows you to write to a specific directory? Just
a thought.
-Sho