gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu (01/06/90)
As a first-time developer for the macintosh, I have some new
impressions about the way Apple does things. From my impressions of
how Apple handles new enhancements, here is a predicted press release
for system 7.0.
-----------------------
APPLE DOCUMENTS SYSTEM 7.0 VIRTUAL MEMORY INTERFACE
CUPERTINO, California--April 12, 1990--Apple Computer, Inc.
released software interfaces for system 7.0, the next version of the
Macintosh operating system. These interfaces will eventually be
included inside Macintosh, volume 6.
According to Apple, virtual memory extensions will resemble most
other extensions to the macintosh line of computers. Each new
computer model will have a slightly different ROM with a slightly
different interface, and developers will be expected to check
explicitly which computer and which ROM is being used, before using
any virtual memory feature. Apple will also be releasing
VirtualFinder, an enhancement to Multifinder. Therefore, developers
must also check whether their software is running in Finder,
MultiFinder, or VirtualFinder. Actually, there will be no explicit
way to do this. Apple recommends that, before calling any procedure
that might be available through multifinder or virtualfinder, you
should check to see if it is implemented. Eventually, Apple hopes to
make all 700 procedures in the toolbox work this way. That way,
Apple will be free to discard portions of the toolbox. Programmers
will be expected to use other portions of the toolbox (or their own
custom code) to simulate the pieces that Apple intends to throw away.
The most powerful applications will have a "VirtualFinder -
Friendly" bit set, which indicates that the application understands
all the new features in virtualfinder, and has been rewritten to
handle them. Most existing Multifinder programs will break or cause
problems under virtual finder. The Apple "Programmer's Guide to
VirtualFinder", 96 pages of critical technical details, will be
available 6 months after system 7.0, at a cost of only $100 to
certified developers. As usual, non-certified developers will be
prohibited from obtaining this documentation.
In a related note, Apple has announced that it has acquired MacTutor
magazine in order to enlarge the staff of its new _d e v e l o p_
magazine, which is only for privileged Apple developers. Apple's head
of user documentation, Bruce "blood sucking" Leach, was quoted as
saying,
"These small-time developers are ruining the Macintosh Interface.
Therefore, we have decided to close the macintosh software
architecture to poor programmers. They say that, to get in the mood
for photography, you must burn a $100 bill. Well, we here at Apple
say, "To get in the mood for Macintosh programming, you're gonna hafta
burn a $1000 bill." We never intended for mom & pop operations to
program the macintosh, and we apologize to our users for this lack of
vision."ksand@appleoz.oz.au (Kent Sandvik) (01/12/90)
gillies@p.cs.uiuc.edu writes in article <104700068@p.cs.uiuc.edu>:
The most powerful applications will have a "VirtualFinder -
Friendly" bit set, which indicates that the application understands
all the new features in virtualfinder, and has been rewritten to
handle them. Most existing Multifinder programs will break or cause
problems under virtual finder. The Apple "Programmer's Guide to
VirtualFinder", 96 pages of critical technical details, will be
available 6 months after system 7.0, at a cost of only $100 to
certified developers. As usual, non-certified developers will be
prohibited from obtaining this documentation.
Stuff as this is never needed, as long as programmers conform to the rules
defined in Inside Mac and additional Tech Notes. It's like programming
other systems, if you cheat, you get into trouble later. I hope that
restrictive programming is done in the Mac community, because if this is
done a lot of trouble is avoided.
It seems like the worry is not ot have access to the latest interfaces
for System 7 programming. Well, there's always the possibility to become
a registered programmer if you have a good idea. It is the product and
the ideas that count.
In a related note, Apple has announced that it has acquired MacTutor
magazine in order to enlarge the staff of its new _d e v e l o p_
magazine, which is only for privileged Apple developers. Apple's head
of user documentation, Bruce "blood sucking" Leach, was quoted as
saying,
"These small-time developers are ruining the Macintosh Interface.
Therefore, we have decided to close the macintosh software
architecture to poor programmers. They say that, to get in the mood
for photography, you must burn a $100 bill. Well, we here at Apple
say, "To get in the mood for Macintosh programming, you're gonna hafta
burn a $1000 bill." We never intended for mom & pop operations to
program the macintosh, and we apologize to our users for this lack of
vision."
Hmm, compare the Apple Developer program with the one on the PC side, hey
there is none for the PC programmers... And if you want to become an OS/2
developer, you need even more cash.
/ksand
--
Kent Sandvik -- ksand@appleoz.oz.AU | Apple Australia DTS Ph: +61 2 452 82 93
{uunet,mcvax}!munnari!appleoz.oz!ksand | AppleLink: AUSTAUX, Discl: All comments mine
(or ksand@apple.com if nothing else works) d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte) (01/13/90)
In article <917@appleoz.oz.au> ksand@appleoz.oz.AU (Kent Sandvik) writes: >It seems like the worry is not ot have access to the latest interfaces >for System 7 programming. Well, there's always the possibility to become >a registered programmer if you have a good idea. It is the product and >the ideas that count. And the goddamn *&%$ MONEY ! $1000 is mcuh money to a lowly college student, and if I want to give the thing away I'll never get the money back. >Hmm, compare the Apple Developer program with the one on the PC side, hey >there is none for the PC programmers... And if you want to become an OS/2 >developer, you need even more cash. Yeah, right, "THe'ry worse so we're good". Sure. h+ -- --- Stay alert ! - Trust no one ! - Keep your laser handy ! --- h+@nada.kth.se == h+@proxxi.se == Jon Watte longer .sig available on request
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (01/13/90)
In article <2707@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: > In article <917@appleoz.oz.au> ksand@appleoz.oz.AU (Kent Sandvik) writes: > > >It seems like the worry is not ot have access to the latest interfaces > >for System 7 programming. Well, there's always the possibility to become > >a registered programmer if you have a good idea. It is the product and > >the ideas that count. > > And the goddamn *&%$ MONEY ! $1000 is mcuh money to a lowly > college student, and if I want to give the thing away I'll > never get the money back. > > >Hmm, compare the Apple Developer program with the one on the PC side, hey > >there is none for the PC programmers... And if you want to become an OS/2 > >developer, you need even more cash. > > Yeah, right, "THe'ry worse so we're good". Sure. Hey, cool down, guys! Please take note of the fact that the $1000 figure did NOT come out of Apple. It was included in an article (104700068@p.cs.uiuc.edu) which was a somewhat sarcastic and cynical prediction of what the System 7.0 release terms might be like. This article appears to be an "If this goes on..." extrapolation of what life might be like if all the worst Apple policies and mistakes were extended to the point of utter ridiculousness. Go back and read the article, please! I'd be the last person to say that Apple always does everything in a wonderful, developer-friendly fashion. It's true that certain valuable (and often important) information comes out late... I'm still waiting to see an official, cleaned-up Tech Note writeup on the 32-bit Color QuickDraw code, which has been out since last May. It's true that Apple doesn't always make it easy to stay within the rules... they do, sometimes, change the System in a way which causes previously- conforming code to break. NEVERTHELESS, it is _entirely_ possible for people to write clean, effective, and flexible code which takes good advantage of the Mac's capabilities, and which can survive changes in the OS, WITHOUT having to sign up as Partners or Associates. You do NOT have to invest $600 or more for a one-year Partnership to get the info you need. You can do quite well with a copy of Inside Mac I through V, a reasonably up-to-date set of Tech Notes, and a few odd items from APDA. That's what I had when I wrote MandelZot, and Eradicat'Em... I've never been a Partner nor an Associate. If you can afford a Mac at all, you can almost certainly afford every piece of documentation that you need to do an effective job of writing Mac software. Yes, it's true that there is some detailed tech information that isn't currently available to anybody other than Apple insiders, Partners, and Associates. Most of this seems to be low-level information needed only if you're going to _really_ be getting intimate with the innards of the Operating System and Toolbox... and a lot of it is the sort of thing which is naturally subject to change from one release to the next. Apple hasn't been perfect at assuring compatibility from one release to the next. Sometimes they make mistakes, and break things. Sometimes they decide to rethink some earlier design decisions, and rework the guts of one Manager or another in the interests of future growth. Nevertheless, I feel that they're doing a very credible job. Yes, it may take Apple a while to get all of the tech-documentation for System 7.0 into everybody's hands. That's probably inevitable... 7.0 is a _big_ change, there's a lot of work to be done, and some aspects of 7.1 will probably change again in the release which follows (7.1 or whatever). I don't doubt that Apple will document 7.0 as soon as is practical. If you're simply writing "hobby" programs, or software that you plan to give away, then it doesn't seem unreasonable to wait until System 7.0 is out, is solid, and is adequately documented before you start writing code which depends on its new features. If you "absolutely, positively, gotta" have your code ready to hit the street the moment that 7.0 is released, then it's not unreasonable to pay the price for some hand- holding and pre-release support from Apple's DTS group. Yes, it would be nice if Apple were to subsidize its DTS group, and APDA, more than they do... so that these groups could afford to provide support products and services below their real cost, in the interest of encouraging good product development. However, I'm not about to hold my breath waiting for Apple (or _any_ large American company) to start giving away money in this way. It's rarely done. -- Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 493-8805 UUCP: ...!{ames,apple,uunet}!coherent!dplatt DOMAIN: dplatt@coherent.com INTERNET: coherent!dplatt@ames.arpa, ...@uunet.uu.net USNAIL: Coherent Thought Inc. 3350 West Bayshore #205 Palo Alto CA 94303
d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte) (01/13/90)
In article <44580@improper.coherent.com> dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) writes: >In article <2707@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: >> In article <917@appleoz.oz.au> ksand@appleoz.oz.AU (Kent Sandvik) writes: >> And the goddamn *&%$ MONEY ! $1000 is much money to a lowly >Hey, cool down, guys! Please take note of the fact that the $1000 >figure did NOT come out of Apple. It was included in an article But it did ! I had that figure from Apple to become an overseas Partner/Associate. Note the domain ... .se ! >Yes, it would be nice if Apple were to subsidize its DTS group, and APDA, >more than they do... so that these groups could afford to provide ... >start giving away money in this way. It's rarely done. But they'd get the money back, manyfold ! Good developer support -> good programs fast -> buyers percieve Apple as ahead of the competition -> more macs sold. h+ -- --- Stay alert ! - Trust no one ! - Keep your laser handy ! --- h+@nada.kth.se == h+@proxxi.se == Jon Watte longer .sig available on request
dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) (01/14/90)
In article <2716@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes: > In article <44580@improper.coherent.com> I wrote > >Hey, cool down, guys! Please take note of the fact that the $1000 > >figure did NOT come out of Apple. It was included in an article > > But it did ! I had that figure from Apple to become an overseas > Partner/Associate. Note the domain ... .se ! I stand corrected. Please accept my apologies for misstating the case. > >Yes, it would be nice if Apple were to subsidize its DTS group, and APDA, > >more than they do... so that these groups could afford to provide > ... > >start giving away money in this way. It's rarely done. > > But they'd get the money back, manyfold ! > > Good developer support -> good programs fast -> buyers > percieve Apple as ahead of the competition -> more macs sold. Well, perhaps. I don't think it's that simple, though. Apple is a business. In particular, it's a business anchored in the United States. It operates under a financial system that places a great deal of importance on short-term results... the day-to-day stock price, and the quarterly financial reports, are the metrics by which most U.S. companies are measured. To most U.S. commercial managers, "long-term" issues are those which refer to the next fiscal year. [I wish I were joking, or overstating the case. I'm not joking, nor do I think I'm overstating the case.] Making cash investments, today, in the hope of having improved sales a few years down the road is often viewed as being a speculative, high-risk venture. In big companies, managers aren't well-rewarded for taking risks... they're rewarded for getting the short-term job done, with acceptable quality and at minimum cost. Like most large corporations, Apple is a fragmented and subdivided organization. Different portions of it operate with some degree of independence, and are responsible for their own financial well-being. Most portions of a large corporation are required, by upper management, to operate on a break-even basis or better (10% ROI is a bare minimum for most, I believe). I strongly suspect that Apple's Developer Services group is required to break even... at least on paper. They _must_ charge enough money, to developers or [on paper] to other divisions within Apple, to pay for the services that they provide. I understand that the "new" (Apple- operated) APDA is working on this basis. Yes, it's true that Apple might boost the quality of Mac software by providing less-expensive (subsidized) support to developers. The critical question, from Apple's point of view, would be this: "Is that the best way for us to invest our money?" Providing lots of subsidized support is _expensive_... if even half of the people currently signed up as APDA members were to join up as Partners or Associates at reduced rates, Apple would probably have to hire quite a few additional people to provide the necessary support. Would Apple earn an acceptable return on its investment, as time went by? Maybe so, maybe not. How many computer manufacturers provide heavily-subsidized technical support to large number of developers? Not many... in fact, I don't personally know of _any_ who do so. This strongly suggests that nobody has been prove convincingly that it makes good financial sense to do so. A few years ago, Apple's "Certified Developer" program was rather less expensive that it is today, I believe... but, to qualify at all, you had to prove that you had a product under development, _and_ had already shown yourself capable of developing, marketing, and supporting a product. I don't think this was unfair, since being a Developer gave you the opportunity to buy hardware at a large discount... clearly, Apple wanted to offer the discount (forego the profit) only when dealing with people whose work had a good chance of "making it" in the market, and benefitting Macintosh sales. I wouldn't have qualified back then; neither, I think, would most readers of this newsgroup. Apple has since changed the rules. Today, anybody can become an Associate. The price for doing so is on the rough order of the cost of a decent small hard disk for a Mac. You can also become a Partner, at a slightly higher cost, if you can show that you have a product in development or already on the market... you'll then qualify for developer prices on hardware. Apple has apparently decided that anyone who is developing a serious product, which could really benefit Macintosh sales in the next few years, can afford an investment of $1000 or so if they need direct-line support. Those who cannot afford or justify this investment probably won't be releasing products that will have any measureable effect on the Macintosh market. I've found it possible to do all of the development I wish to do, without having to make the investment in becoming a Partner or Associate. If I were producing software for sale, I could justify the expense. As it is, I can't. Not can I really assert that the software which I write, and give away, is sufficiently important that it would result in any significant increase in Mac sales, and would thus justify (to Apple) any subsidy. Frankly, if Apple decides to spend some money in a way which will lead people to treat them as a true "leading edge" company, I hope they do it by scrapping their ridiculous 90-day warranty, and moving up to AT LEAST 1 year. 2 years would be better. This would directly benefit many, many thousands of Macintosh owners... not just a few hundred developers who want front-line DTS support but can't justify the expense. -- Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 493-8805 UUCP: ...!{ames,apple,uunet}!coherent!dplatt DOMAIN: dplatt@coherent.com INTERNET: coherent!dplatt@ames.arpa, ...@uunet.uu.net USNAIL: Coherent Thought Inc. 3350 West Bayshore #205 Palo Alto CA 94303
d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte) (01/14/90)
In article <44624@improper.coherent.com> dplatt@coherent.com (Dave Platt) writes: >I stand corrected. Please accept my apologies for misstating the case. No big deal. Great of you to confess in being wrong, thogh. >Well, perhaps. I don't think it's that simple, though. >well-rewarded for taking risks... they're rewarded for getting the >short-term job done, with acceptable quality and at minimum cost. And look where it got you :-) >support. Those who cannot afford or justify this investment probably >won't be releasing products that will have any measureable effect on the >Macintosh market. >the expense. As it is, I can't. Not can I really assert that the >software which I write, and give away, is sufficiently important that it >would result in any significant increase in Mac sales, and would thus >justify (to Apple) any subsidy. No, maybe not product A, nor product B, nor even product C, but the multitude of products, all of which functions perfectly and follow the rules (makeing the customer see "Compaq compatibility problems again" but no "Apple ditto" in the papers) >by scrapping their ridiculous 90-day warranty, and moving up to AT LEAST >1 year. 2 years would be better. This would directly benefit many, Well, we don't have these problems, since there's a 2-year warranty by law on everything sold here (and, yes, there is a prejudice regarding a pair of shoes that split in the seams after 1.5 years...) But we have no suits, so we can afford this warranty :-) h+ -- --- Stay alert ! - Trust no one ! - Keep your laser handy ! --- h+@nada.kth.se == h+@proxxi.se == Jon Watte longer .sig available on request