tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot) (12/01/87)
In article <5431@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >Use of HyperCard and MultiFinder constitutes using a standard program under the >standard operating environment, which cannot be done on the middle-of-the- >product-line configuration. Whether something is useful is not the point, it >is whether Apple is providing value and good service to their customers by >putting together a set of system software that purports to multitask but cannot >run two standard programs when given 1 meg of memory. It appears to me that >they are hoping to get people to upgrade their memory. Now, that isn't evil, >but it would be nice if they were a little more honest about it. And a Chevy S-10 can hold 4 kegs of beer, but not 4 elephants (even standard elephants). If this doesn't make sense, read on. >True. I have the option of using the new standard system software, or the >old software that is provided for compatibility with older systems. No, you can simply run the new system software in the single program mode. This IS release software, not a compatibility kluge. Multifinder provides a benefit to those who need or want it. I suppose next you'll argue that you can't run HD20SC Setup on your floppy drives to make them 20 meg. >This is no argument. The fact is, HyperCard is a standard piece of software. So is MacWrite. But I wouldn't force you to use it. >Apple could have put a little effort into making Multifinder smaller. >The fact that Multifinder is an excessive memory hog has been well documented >in this forum. They could also have made HyperCard a little smaller, or at >least segmented it so that it could run in something less the 750K! >(It took a lot of will power not to use an explitive between "750" and "K"). You're very confused. MultiFinder is not a memory hog. MultiFinder only needs about 80K to do it's work. What really happens is that most applications are memory hogs. MultiFinder simply divides up the space avaliable for the applications. If you have 400K available, and the application requires 500K, MultiFinder can't load it. Likewise, I can drive a Chevy S-10, and I can remove the tires. But I can't drive it with the tires off, even though both are standard operations. (Are you starting to pick up on the analogy?) HyperCard only requires 750K when you are scripting. It can get buy on less if you lower your user level. Reread my Chevy analogy before making flames. The rule is simple - you need more to do more. In article <4161@utai.UUCP> dudek@ai.UUCP (Gregory Dudek) writes: >My impression is that by *discontinuing support* for older >Macs, Apple is making a potentially serious mistake. Despite the >elitism prevalent in this group, there are many people who LIKED >the 128K Mac. Some people I consult with use the Mac ONLY for >small-time word processing and were quite happy with MacWrite 2.2!. >One is doing serious accountancy with a 512K Mac and ancient >software . Many "real people" just want to get their job done on a >reasonably stable system irrespective of the latest technology. That's wonderful! And let me be the first to assure you that MacWrite 2.2 will always work on a 128K Macintosh. > I would have though Apple could keep supporting older configurations >like the 64K ROMs for a few more years without that much trouble. >That doesn't mean drastically new software, just hardware support >and maybe a few minor software fixes to existing packages. I don't follow you. What do you mean by "hardware support"? And what minor fixes? The old systems work just fine on the old hardware. We haven't broken anything; we've simply added stuff that you can't do on the old hardware, such as SCSI and Color Quickdraw. >If I have to go telling people that they have to shell out $1.3K >for an upgrade (that's what it costs here, before tax) just to get >continuing support, I can guarantee some will be quite displeased. No one HAS to buy an upgrade. Only if you want to use the whizzy new software, like HyperCard and MultiFinder. I don't understand what these people are losing? Opportunity - yes, but nothing that they had previously. > Perhaps Apple wants to encourage people to upgrade by explicitly >not coming out with upgrades to 64K ROM software. That's the >kind of blackmail that I don't think will pay off. The 64K to 128K ROM upgrade costs $300 and includes a disk drive. If you can't afford that, how can you any of the serious business packages that use it, like 4th Dimension, Excel, and DBase Mac? _emt
dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) (12/01/87)
Well Hp, Dec and IBM all have many more models of Machines--departmental minicomputers that have Much larger OSs to support and much more complicated problems with supporting extremely odd combinations of peripherals and application/database products running on them. And they actually have support organizations and hotlines you can call to get answers and problems solved. They don't just refer you to some uninformed technically incompetent retail dealer! The Operating System Labs in these companies have to deal with hundreds of thousands of lines of source code and work on multiple versions of releases of their OS and language products. However, these companies do obsolete machines from time to time and they do come out with new products that hopefully offer a customer better performance, cost or "shudder" functionality. These products do seem to have a longer shelf life than those on Apples Macintosh line. Perhaps with the advent of enough slots on the Mac II one will be able to purchase one and be able to stay current for a reasonable period of time. Personally I would not buy a Plus or an SE as I think Apple will obsolete them by 1989 and I would not want to have spent 3k or so just to find myself way behind the times! I would not be so pessimistic if the architecture of these two machines provided me with an easy way to upgrade and stay current with the state of Apple Technology. The Plus is now a dead end machine, you can not upgrade it to an SE nor is there color available on the SE. I want Color and mac II performance. Well enough of these incoherent ramblings...
kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) (12/02/87)
In article <6863@apple.UUCP> tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot) writes: >In article <5431@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >>True. I have the option of using the new standard system software, or the >>old software that is provided for compatibility with older systems. >No, you can simply run the new system software in the single program mode. >This IS release software, not a compatibility kluge. Multifinder provides >a benefit to those who need or want it. I suppose next you'll argue that >you can't run HD20SC Setup on your floppy drives to make them 20 meg. Did I attack you? Why are you trying to insult me? >>This is no argument. The fact is, HyperCard is a standard piece of software. >So is MacWrite. But I wouldn't force you to use it. Let me put it a slightly different way. I just shelled out money for an SE with an imagewriter and a modem. According to the literature and the Apple authorized dealers, this configuration is the middle-of-the-line. When I bought my system it could run all of the Apple standard software. Less than 90 days later it cannot. Since Apple has released Multifinder and Hypercard as standard system software (and not as separate products) that makes me think that Apple considers a Macintosh running Multifinder and Hypercard as their standard system. Voila, I am substandard. Why do I think this? Because I have seen other computer companies do this same sort of thing while phasing out smaller configurations. >>Apple could have put a little effort into making Multifinder smaller. >>The fact that Multifinder is an excessive memory hog has been well documented >>in this forum. They could also have made HyperCard a little smaller, or at >>least segmented it so that it could run in something less the 750K! >>(It took a lot of will power not to use an explitive between "750" and "K"). > >You're very confused. MultiFinder is not a memory hog. MultiFinder only ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Another insult. >needs about 80K to do it's work. What really happens is that most applications >are memory hogs. MultiFinder simply divides up the space avaliable for >the applications. If you have 400K available, and the application >requires 500K, MultiFinder can't load it. Likewise, I can drive a Chevy S-10, >and I can remove the tires. But I can't drive it with the tires off, even >though both are standard operations. (Are you starting to pick up on the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >analogy?) ^^^^^^^^^^ Another insult. >HyperCard only requires 750K when you are scripting. It can get buy on >less if you lower your user level. Reread my Chevy analogy before making >flames. The rule is simple - you need more to do more. ^^^^^^ Another insult. Whether it is MultiFinder that is the hog or the combination of Multifinder and the System, it is a fact that Hypercard can run under the Finder, but Hypercard cannot run under Multifinder and remain fully functional. Earlier in this conversation thread another Apple employee displayed a condescending attitude toward people who expressed disapproval of the increased memory requirements for the new set of standard software. If I take your comments and those of the other Apple employee as exemplary of Apple's attitude (and I do since you both posted as Apple employees) then I can only assume that Apple is really callous to my concerns that Apple will drop support for my machine. Now, as for flaming: I posted a serious note about what I perceive as Apple reducing support for the machine I just bought. You are free to disagree. *FLAME ON* The tenor of your reply is totally inappropriate in this forum and for your position as a representative of Apple. You only do Apple harm when you foster ill will by insulting customers. If I knew of this hostile attitude by Apple employees before buying my Macintosh, I might not have bought it. So what, only one sale you may say. If you feel that way, then I suggest you take it up with your supervisor or John Scully. In any event I suggest you discuss your attitude with your supervisor. If you worked for me, at the very least, you would be severely reprimanded for insulting the customers. And I would probably prohibit you from posting to the net from the Apple machine. *FLAME OFF*
mday@cgl.ucsf.edu.UUCP (12/03/87)
In article <5488@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >Let me put it a slightly different way. I just shelled out money for an SE >with an imagewriter and a modem. According to the literature and the Apple >authorized dealers, this configuration is the middle-of-the-line. When I >bought my system it could run all of the Apple standard software. Less >than 90 days later it cannot. Since Apple has released Multifinder and >Hypercard as standard system software (and not as separate products) that >makes me think that Apple considers a Macintosh running Multifinder and >Hypercard as their standard system. Voila, I am substandard. At the risk or starting a flame war, I have to comment about this. 1.In the first place, Apple did release HyperCard and Multifinder as separate products (Just ask any one of the thousands of Mac users tha shelled out $49 for each.) 2. You really don't have a leg to stand on when you conclude that an SE with 1 MB is substandard. That are hundreds of thousands of Pluses and 512Es out there that are still useful machines despite the fact that their hardware is even less capable than your SE. You may feel like you need more memory to do everything you like (Who doesn't), but you can use your SE in its present configuration to run either Multifinder or HyperCard. >If you worked for me, at the very least, you would be severely reprimanded >for insulting the customers. And I would probably prohibit you from posting >to the net from the Apple machine. no! No! NO!.. The "rest of us" on the net would like to encourage *more* contributions from people at Apple. When you read their posts, you should realize that they are replying as individuals, and not as Apple representatives. Unfavorably commenting on the "professionalism" of their posts is only hurting the net. The tone of the article in question may have been slightly sarcastic, but I wouldn't have considered it insulting, even if it had been directed at me. The next time that you (or anybody else on the net for that matter) feel insulted, try counting to 10 and repeating to yourself "Sticks and stones may break my bones but......" before you flame anybody, especially if your flame has the potential to alter company policies on its employees posting to the net. You may have felt better for 10 seconds after posting your flame, but the consequences of it are probably going to last much longer. ---------- Mark Day UUCP: ..ucbvax!ucsfcgl!mday ARPA: mday@cgl.ucsf.edu BITNET: mday@ucsfcgl.BITNET
shap@sfsup.UUCP (12/03/87)
In article <5488@oberon.USC.EDU>, kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu.UUCP writes:
.....
I think that this has gone on long enough, and that everyone,
including you, Mr. Kurtzman, is overreacting.
While I think it is debatable that Hypercard is 'Standard Software,'
the whole discussion has missed the point. Hypercard isn't the problem.
Multifinder, or rather multitasking, is. If you want to multitask, and
you want to run many large applications, and you don't want to pay
for memory management (which costs a lot, still), then you have
to give in somewhere.
While HyperCard could be made smaller, as a Mac programmer I feel
confident in saying that it could not be made smaller very easily, nor
very significantly, without a *lot* more work. Would you rather
have waited another year?
... Ah well, I hadn't intended to get into that conversation. What I
did want to say is that there are no conspiracies going on, and it
is in mostly Mr. Kurtzman's willingness to take offense which has
generated all of the flames at him. Please gentlemen, would ALL of
you go find another sandbox to fight in? This discussion could be
profitable, but it isn't.
Jon Shapirolevin@bbn.COM (Joel B Levin) (12/03/87)
In article <5488@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes:
:
:Whether it is MultiFinder that is the hog or the combination of Multifinder
:and the System, it is a fact that Hypercard can run under the Finder, but
:Hypercard cannot run under Multifinder and remain fully functional.
Please don't infer from the fact that they are giving you a lot of
software with the machine the notion that you have to be able to use
it all at once. When I got my 128K I got macwrite, macpaint, and the
system with it -- but I couldn't use it all at once. Until, that is,
I got upgraded to 512K and Switcher. I didn't hear anyone complain
then.
Hypercard is useful for a lot of things, and the utility of
Multifinder should be obvious. If you want to use Hypercard under MF,
yes, you'll need more memory. Hypercard remains just about as useful
without, however. Multifinder remains useful (I hope - I haven't got
it yet) for other smaller applications I use a lot, I just can't run
them with Hypercard until I get more memory.
I see what you are complaining about, and I can't deny your right to
do so; however IMHO your complaint is pretty thin.
/JBL
PS I also think you were overly sensitive to say the least to the
previous response.
--
UUCP: {harvard, husc6, etc.}!bbn!levin
ARPA: levin@bbn.comdrc@dbase.UUCP (12/04/87)
In article <11540059@hpsmtc1.HP.COM>, dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) writes: > Well Hp, Dec and IBM all have many more models of Machines--departmental > minicomputers that have Much larger OSs to support and much more complicated > problems with supporting extremely odd combinations of peripherals and > application/database products running on them. And they actually have support > organizations and hotlines you can call to get answers and problems solved. > They don't just refer you to some uninformed technically incompetent retail > dealer! Yeah, but try to get an answer from any of these companies concerning their PC lines (those against which the Mac competes). I'm a published developer and couldn't get an answer from either IBM or DEC about their PCs other than, "Please contact your dealer." Does this sound familiar? It is an extremely unfortunate fact of life that not one of the major computer manufacturers support their PC lines directly, relying instead on their dealer networks. Maybe it has something to do with the difference between a $3K system and a $300K system and their perspective of priorities. Dennis Cohen Ashton-Tate Glendale Development Center --------------------------------------- Disclaimer: The above represents my personal opinions, nothing more or less.
stuart@ihlpf.UUCP (12/04/87)
In article <10528@cgl.ucsf.EDU>, mday@cgl.ucsf.edu (Mark Day) writes: > In article <5488@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: [Repost of Kurtzman's complaints about memory usage of new Apple software] [Mark Day tries to explain again that the machines are still good ] > >If you worked for me, at the very least, you would be severely reprimanded > >for insulting the customers. And I would probably prohibit you from posting > >to the net from the Apple machine. > > no! No! NO!.. > The "rest of us" on the net would like to encourage *more* contributions > from people at Apple. When you read their posts, you should realize that AGREED!! > they are replying as individuals, and not as Apple representatives. > Unfavorably commenting on the "professionalism" of their posts is only > hurting the net. The tone of the article in question may have been slightly > sarcastic, but I wouldn't have considered it insulting, even if it had been ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I, too, was surprised to hear that Ed was being insulting. First, he tried to illuminate the idea that new software does not imply you can used it ("next you'll want HDsetup to give you 20 meg on your floppies", or something). No insult, just an analogy to your expectation that the new software cannot require more new hardware. Then he said that you were very confused. If you misunderstand, you *ARE* confused, and if the misunderstanding is great, then *very* confused. This may be an opinion, but not an insult. Confusion is a fact, not an insult. So let's just get to the issues - we would like to get more out of our Macs, and we'd like the informed people (including people who work at Apple, even when they are not *official* reps) to help us out. Don't stop this!!!! MultiFinder is NOT a memory hog. It does a LOT in only 80K or so. I have had 3 or 4 applications running at the same time on a 1meg Mac+. The size of the applications is what counts. I would, however agree that HyperCard is a Hog. It can be run reduced, but it really eats memory. -- Stuart Ericson USnail: AT&T Bell Laboratories USENET: ...!ihnp4!ihlpf!stuart IH 6M-313 voice: (312) 979-4152 Naperville-Wheaton Rd. Naperville, Il 60566
goldman@apple.UUCP (Phil Goldman) (12/06/87)
In article <2957@ihlpf.ATT.COM> stuart@ihlpf.ATT.COM (S. D. Ericson) writes: >MultiFinder is NOT a memory hog. It does a LOT in only 80K or so. > MultiFinder proper takes up only 37K. Backgrounder, which is the background printing controller, takes up about 12k more (but is only there if you have installed background printing). >I have had 3 or 4 applications running at the same time on a 1meg >Mac+. The size of the applications is what counts. > In fact, you can run 3-4 applications + the Finder on a 512ke. Try using MacWrite, MacPaint, MacDraw, WriteNow, or Word 1.05. Each of these was designed to run on a 128k Mac and therefore can run in a 96k partition. You might have to lower the Finder size a bit to do so. I would, however >agree that HyperCard is a Hog. It can be run reduced, but it really >eats memory. > HyperCard can actually run in less than the 750K minimum partition that is specified in the SIZE resource it is shipped with. However, 750K is the minimum if you want to do scripting. If you simply want to browse, I believe that somewhere around 550-600K will do. Therefore, you CAN run both MultiFinder and HyperCard on a 1 meg MacPlus. NOTE: It is probably not a very good idea to change the size for an app to lower than its minimum size if you don't have to. In any case, you might want to make a Backup before doing so.
tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot) (12/07/87)
(Normally, I'd do this by mail, but our mailer is broken) First, let me apologize. I had no idea that you take offense so easily. I had no intention of insulting you. I was merely trying to clear up some misconceptions upon your part by use of metaphor. I'm sorry to have offended you. I (and Apple) really do care about our customers. That was why I attempted to provide you with information you were lacking. Having failed that, I now will abandon the discussion. _emt
john@felix.UUCP (John Gilbert) (12/09/87)
In article <5488@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >In article <6863@apple.UUCP> tecot@apple.UUCP (Ed Tecot) writes: >>In article <5431@oberon.USC.EDU> kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: > >Let me put it a slightly different way. I just shelled out money for an SE >with an imagewriter and a modem. According to the literature and the Apple >authorized dealers, this configuration is the middle-of-the-line. When I bought >my system it could run all of the Apple standard software. Less than 90 days >later it cannot. YES IT CAN!!! YES IT CAN!!! YES IT CAN!!!! You keep saying this. Your above statement is at face value NOT TRUE! You CAN run Multifinder! You CAN run HyperCard! You CAN NOT run them together, although playing with HyperCard's memory requirements (you CAN reduce them with experimentation) may allow you to. > Since Apple has released Multifinder and Hypercard as standard >system software (and not as separate products) that makes me think that Apple >considers a Macintosh running Multifinder and Hypercard as their standard >system. HyperCard and Multifinder are absolutely separate products, with separate product numbers, and available for purchase SEPARATELY. The fact that they both come free with new Macs does not mean they are guaranteed to both run together. > >>>Apple could have put a little effort into making Multifinder smaller. >>>The fact that Multifinder is an excessive memory hog has been well documented >>>in this forum. They could also have made HyperCard a little smaller, or at >>>least segmented it so that it could run in something less the 750K! >>>(It took a lot of will power not to use an explitive between "750" and "K"). >> >>You're very confused. MultiFinder is not a memory hog. MultiFinder only > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Another insult. He could have said something like "you don't know what you are talking about". You DO have some facts wrong. >>though both are standard operations. (Are you starting to pick up on the > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>analogy?) >^^^^^^^^^^ > >Another insult. I don't hear too many folks feeling sorry for you here. >>HyperCard only requires 750K when you are scripting. It can get buy on >>less if you lower your user level. Reread my Chevy analogy before making >>flames. The rule is simple - you need more to do more. > ^^^^^^ > >Another insult. Where? >Whether it is MultiFinder that is the hog or the combination of Multifinder >and the System, it is a fact that Hypercard can run under the Finder, but >Hypercard cannot run under Multifinder and remain fully functional. Show me where you were promised it would. Why do you insist that because they both came free in the same package that they should be required to work together? So far, all you have stated, basically, is that they gave you both of them and YOU have decided this means they have to work together on the system you bought. >Earlier in this conversation thread another Apple employee displayed a >condescending attitude toward people who expressed disapproval of the >increased memory requirements for the new set of standard software. If I take >your comments and those of the other Apple employee as exemplary of Apple's >attitude (and I do since you both posted as Apple employees) then I can only >assume that Apple is really callous to my concerns that Apple will drop support >for my machine. > >Now, as for flaming: I posted a serious note about what I perceive >as Apple reducing support for the machine I just bought. You are free >to disagree. You posted a serious note complaining that YOU did not think it was fair that the software does not work as you want to use it. You consistantly misrepresent the truth with your comment that your 1meg SE will not run the software. It will, and I have an SE down the hall to prove it. Now you say they are "reducing support". What does that mean? They give you great products (GIVE THEM TO YOU), and you bellyache that the support is diminished. You complain that you cant run them, when you could make the best of your machine and run them however you can. In a previous posting you commented on the order that (paraphrase) the fact that it can still get the job done is not the point. Why not. Most of us own computers to USE them to get things done! >*FLAME ON* > >The tenor of your reply is totally inappropriate in this forum and for your >position as a representative of Apple. You only do Apple harm when you foster >ill will by insulting customers. If I knew of this hostile attitude by Apple >employees before buying my Macintosh, I might not have bought it. So what, >only one sale you may say. If you feel that way, then I suggest you take it >up with your supervisor or John Scully. In any event I suggest you discuss >your attitude with your supervisor. If you worked for me, at the very least, >you would be severely reprimanded for insulting the customers. And I would >probably prohibit you from posting to the net from the Apple machine. > >*FLAME OFF* My FLAME is already on, so I 'll just turn it up a bit.... You have exagerated Mr. Tecot's attitude. I do not agree that his comments were "insults". Nor is his tenor "hostile". Check your dictionary to see what that really means. I for one feel that you are way out of bounds here. HE didn't say "so what, only one sale"... YOU did. HE tried to respond to your posting, which was pretty inflamitory in itself. He is human, and if he has an attitude, so be it. I do not find that attitude "hostile" in any form. Others here on the NET may disagree with me. So far, you are lacking in support. Sorry to the rest of us. John Gilbert -- John Gilbert !trwrb!felix!john