eacj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Julian Vrieslander) (10/16/88)
When I got the most recent set of Tech Notes, I noticed that the index now
shows that many of the older notes have been revised (with a 3/88 revision
date, if I remember right). I called up APDA to find out if subscribers
would receive new versions of the older notes. In typical APDA tradition,
the customer service reps had no idea what was going on: "Uhh, we don't
know, all we do is sell the stuff. We don't look inside the packages." That
is a direct quote. Does anyone else know what is going on here? I would
normally not worry about this. But I have seen references, in this group
and in some other Apple docs, to pages in older Tech Notes that do not
exist in my versions. This makes me wonder if some of the revisions might be
significant.
By the way, what is the story on APDA? There were rumors a while ago that
Apple was going to pull the plug on them, and reorganize the doc. distribution
back into their own support system. Is this still going to happen? If so,
I won't miss them: they've screwed up every order I've made.
--
Julian Vrieslander "Don't rush me... you'll get a rotten miracle."
Neurobiology & Behavior, W250 Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853
UUCP: {cmcl2,decvax,rochester,uw-beaver,ihnp4}!cornell!batcomputer!eacj
INTERNET: eacj@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu BITNET: eacj@CRNLTHRYbob@eecs.nwu.edu (Bob Hablutzel) (10/16/88)
>When I got the most recent set of Tech Notes, I noticed that the index now >shows that many of the older notes have been revised (with a 3/88 revision >date, if I remember right). I called up APDA to find out if subscribers >would receive new versions of the older notes. In typical APDA tradition, >the customer service reps had no idea what was going on: "Uhh, we don't >know, all we do is sell the stuff. We don't look inside the packages." That >is a direct quote. Does anyone else know what is going on here? I would >normally not worry about this. But I have seen references, in this group >and in some other Apple docs, to pages in older Tech Notes that do not >exist in my versions. This makes me wonder if some of the revisions might be >significant. All the Tech Notes were revised recently. The revision seems to have been to remove certain items from the Tech Notes either irrelevant (bugs in earlier systems), unsupported (commentary on the 64K ROMs), or no longer in Apple's domain (MacWrite internal file format). In most cases, the "revision" was basically to say "Dis Tech Note retroactively ain't", although in slightly better language. Bob Hablutzel BOB@NUACC.ACNS.NWU.EDU
mjohnson@Apple.COM (Mark Johnson) (10/17/88)
In article <6610@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> eacj@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Julian Vrieslander) writes: >When I got the most recent set of Tech Notes, I noticed that the index now >shows that many of the older notes have been revised (with a 3/88 revision >date, if I remember right). I called up APDA to find out if subscribers >would receive new versions of the older notes. In typical APDA tradition, >the customer service reps had no idea what was going on: "Uhh, we don't All of the Mac Tech Notes were revised in March 1988 and are available as a complete set from APDA (product number KMB010 in the July '88 catalog). Mark B. Johnson Developer Technical Support Apple Computer, Inc.
wilson@csli.STANFORD.EDU (Nathan Wilson) (10/20/88)
I just finished downloading all the Technotes from the sumex archive.
They appear to all be from the recent update, however I do have one
gripe. They are still all in MacWrite format. It seems that Apple
has no business continuing to force that brain damaged (personal
opinion) editor down peoples throats, particularly hackers who almost
exclusively use 'pure' text editors. I know that most word processors
have the ability to read MacWrite format documents but they tend to be
quite slow, and slightly off in various little unaesthetic ways
(aesthetics being the presumed goal of putting the notes in something
more that TEXT format in the first place.. I have contemplated and
even begun the tedious process of converting all 200+ technotes to
TEXT format, and had a few questions. First, has anyone already done
this so I can avoid doing it? Would anyone else have a use for them
and am I allowed to distribute them? I was thinking about making them
TeachText documents and was wondering how people get PICTs into such
and how to create ttro documents (these are the teach text documents
with the funny icon that looks like a bunch of hieroglyphs with a
window on top). I suspect the right thing to do would be to have both
pure TEXT versions of all the technotes so that you can call them
up/grep through them with your favorite utilities, and also ttro
versions for the ones that have pictures. The TEXT versions could
include references to pictures in the appropriate places.
Nathan Wilsonmjohnson@Apple.COM (Mark Johnson) (10/20/88)
In article <6018@csli.STANFORD.EDU> wilson@csli.UUCP (Nathan Wilson) writes: > >I just finished downloading all the Technotes from the sumex archive. >They appear to all be from the recent update, however I do have one >gripe. They are still all in MacWrite format. It seems that Apple >has no business continuing to force that brain damaged (personal >opinion) editor down peoples throats, particularly hackers who almost >exclusively use 'pure' text editors. I know that most word processors >have the ability to read MacWrite format documents but they tend to be >quite slow, and slightly off in various little unaesthetic ways >(aesthetics being the presumed goal of putting the notes in something >more that TEXT format in the first place.. I have contemplated and >even begun the tedious process of converting all 200+ technotes to >TEXT format, and had a few questions. First, has anyone already done >this so I can avoid doing it? Would anyone else have a use for them >and am I allowed to distribute them? I was thinking about making them >TeachText documents and was wondering how people get PICTs into such >and how to create ttro documents (these are the teach text documents >with the funny icon that looks like a bunch of hieroglyphs with a >window on top). I suspect the right thing to do would be to have both >pure TEXT versions of all the technotes so that you can call them >up/grep through them with your favorite utilities, and also ttro >versions for the ones that have pictures. The TEXT versions could >include references to pictures in the appropriate places. > Nathan Wilson As the person now responsible for all the Tech Notes, I thank Nathan for voicing his opinion on this topic. The reason Tech Notes are still distributed in MacWrite format is to facilitate their reproduction, "aesthetics" and graphics intact, by those who receive only the electronically-distributed copies. I am currently investigating distributing the Notes in formats other than MacWrite, but the problem is weighing the pros and cons of making a major change like this and knowing how the public will react -- some people can only get the Notes electronically, and they are much more concerned with being able to print them out and put them in a binder (without having to reformat them) than reading them on-line or using them from an editor. I would venture a guess that the majority of people who get the Notes electronically do print them and prefer the formatting and style options that just are not available in an ASCII file. If you get Tech Notes electronically, you can help me by sending your suggestions on how you would like to see Tech Notes distributed. Do we fix something that many considered "not broken?" Do we distribute them as text files? MacWrite files? Teach Text files? Another WP format? A combination of the above choices? Do you usually print them, and if so, do you still use the disk files, or do you tend to refer to the paper copies more often? Any suggestions will be considered, even if it is to maintain the status quo. If the demand for text files (or another format) is great enough, I will do what I can to make sure we distribute them that way. It would be okay for someone like Nathan to convert and distribute them, but I would rather any mistakes in a conversion be traceable directly to the source - Apple, not someone on the net who is just trying to help out. I also think it is our job to provide you with the tools you need in a format you can use, so you can spend your time writing great software and not doing the things that we should be doing for you. Please send your suggestions and comments to me at the address below and let me know what you would like to see. I won't promise that we will change things, but I will promise that if a large number of people feel strongly one way or another, I can build a much better case for change than without your input. Thanks. Mark B. Johnson {amdahl,decwrl,sun,voder}!apple!mjohnson Developer Technical Support mjohnson@Apple.com Apple Computer, Inc.