fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) (02/15/91)
In article <9102150545.aa05600@Bonnie.ics.uci.edu> rhutchin@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU writes: >I wonder why Apple is so naive as to think that "distribution" of all these >beta versions of system 7.0b???? is totally under control. Many of my Mac >acquantances, who are no more developers than Saddam Hussein is a good guy, >have the latest version, 7.0b4, running on their computers, and have had >7.0b1 or better since a couple days after its Halloween release date. >Disclaimer: I personally have not run it on my machine, mainly because I'm >concerned about VERY important data on my hard drive (not cuz I'd feel bad >about it). > >Anyway, I guess my point is... What is Apple's point in not allowing >distribution? You simply say it >is a real unstable beta that is "for fun" and warn people to use at their >own risk. Could it be that Apple doesn't want to reveal system 7.0, >that it's some big trade secret? Come on, I can assure you that it is no >secret!!! > Clearly Apple is not very concerned about copies of the System betas falling into the "wrong" hands; otherwise they wouldn't have mailed out 9000 copies to developers. There is no shame or secret being hidden. The real reason Apple isn't distributing it is: it's not done. A large company like Apple can't afford to release broken products, even with the understanding that it's not stable, may be dangerous, or whatever. People would get the wrong idea about broken or undocumented features, you'd see endless complaints that it's too slow because people don't understand about debugging code, and others would be angered about losing data because of a crash (even if they knew perfectly well they shouldn't be using it). In the end, everyone would just remember all the bad things about System 7. This ignores the fact that they're not going to go to the expense/effort to send out/upload all the disks and documentation for a toy that's not done. And to really use the betas safely and effectively, you need to carefully look at the stuff on that CD-ROM. Small companies can prerelease products, give out early samples, and discuss future plans because they desperately need publicity and attention. Large companies (Apple, IBM, Ford, etc.) can't risk having their reputation soiled unnecessarily, or being held to an early, imprecise announcement. David Fry fry@math.harvard.EDU Department of Mathematics fry@huma1.bitnet Harvard University ...!harvard!huma1!fry Cambridge, MA 02138
fry@zariski.harvard.edu (David Fry) (02/15/91)
In article <5733@husc6.harvard.edu> I write: >The real reason Apple isn't distributing it is: it's not done. A >large company like Apple can't afford to release broken >products, even with the understanding that it's not stable, >may be dangerous, or whatever. People would get the wrong >idea about broken or undocumented features, you'd see endless >complaints that it's too slow because people don't understand >about debugging code, and others would be angered about losing >data because of a crash (even if they knew perfectly well they >shouldn't be using it). In the end, everyone would just >remember all the bad things about System 7. If I may expand on this: Imagine if Sears announced that they had a really great new blender in the works, but that it's not yet finished. However, if you wished, you could send them $7 to cover shipping and parts, and they would send you a prototype. The understanding is that it works pretty well, but Sears is not responsible for what might happen. Well, it turns out these blenders are pretty good, but the prototypes are rather noisy, they leak sometimes, and a few people have had fingers lopped off by broken blades. What do you think would happen to Sears' reputation and business? Imagine, however, that Lotus had a similar deal involving prototype high-performance racing engines that could be had at cost. A handful of racing teams around the world would buy them, and maybe some drivers would be killed due to defects in the products. Nothing would happen to Lotus in this case because such a small and specialized market is involved. The people that got the engines would be technically capable enough to understand what they were getting involved in. I give these examples in response to the people who expect Apple and IBM to have the same business policies as Sun, Silicon Graphics, and other smaller computer companies that deal with a specialized market. The risk is too great for them. While Cray may be able to release a beta release of its operating system, you can't expect Apple to do so. David Fry fry@math.harvard.EDU Department of Mathematics fry@huma1.bitnet Harvard University ...!harvard!huma1!fry Cambridge, MA 02138
rhutchin@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU (02/15/91)
I wonder why Apple is so naive as to think that "distribution" of all these beta versions of system 7.0b???? is totally under control. Many of my Mac acquantances, who are no more developers than Saddam Hussein is a good guy, have the latest version, 7.0b4, running on their computers, and have had 7.0b1 or better since a couple days after its Halloween release date. Disclaimer: I personally have not run it on my machine, mainly because I'm concerned about VERY important data on my hard drive (not cuz I'd feel bad about it). Anyway, I guess my point is... What is Apple's point in not allowing distribution? You simply say it is a real unstable beta that is "for fun" and warn people to use at their own risk. Could it be that Apple doesn't want to reveal system 7.0, that it's some big trade secret? Come on, I can assure you that it is no secret!!! Well, the way 7.0b4 looks on my buddy's Mac II, I can't wait for the real release!!!! Even though Apple has its head up its collective butt about who gets these things, they sure put together one awesome piece of software!!! Richard B. Hutchings Department of Information and Computer Science UC Irvine
bin@primate.wisc.edu (Brain in Neutral) (02/16/91)
From article <9102150545.aa05600@Bonnie.ics.uci.edu>, by rhutchin@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU: > Anyway, I guess my point is... What is Apple's point in not allowing > distribution? You simply say it > is a real unstable beta that is "for fun" and warn people to use at their > own risk. Could it be that Apple doesn't want to reveal system 7.0, > that it's some big trade secret? Come on, I can assure you that it is no > secret!!! One reason is that the people that get the software on this understanding may well give it to people without telling them about the unstable nature of it. People who get it that way may not realize its beta nature, think it's a mature product, then blame/flame Apple for releasing garbage software. This will still happen anyway, of course, but at least Apple has protected itself via disclaimer and restriction on distribution. -- Paul DuBois dubois@primate.wisc.edu
francis@uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (02/16/91)
In article <3930@uakari.primate.wisc.edu> bin@primate.wisc.edu (Brain in Neutral) writes: From article <9102150545.aa05600@Bonnie.ics.uci.edu>, by rhutchin@Bonnie.ICS.UCI.EDU: > Anyway, I guess my point is... What is Apple's point in not allowing > distribution? You simply say it [...] One reason is that the people that get the software on this understanding may well give it to people without telling them about the unstable nature of it. People who get it that way may not realize its beta nature, think it's a mature product, then blame/flame Apple for releasing garbage software. This will still happen anyway, of course, but at least Apple has protected itself via disclaimer and restriction on distribution. I guess this is probably why they put INIT 12 in there--so anybody that does get it can't say they weren't warned. -- /=============================================================================\ | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Until you stalk and overrun, | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | you can't devour anyone. -- Hobbes | \=============================================================================/
KJSTEELE@MTUS5.BITNET (02/16/91)
All this talk about system 7 on the net makes me want a copy of it so I can check it out. Is there anyway or anywhere I can get a copy? I would like to experiment a little bit. :) Thanks, Kevin J. Steele KJSTEELE@MTUS5.bitnet
wirehead@oxy.edu (David J. Harr) (02/19/91)
David Fry says about why Apple won't release a 7.0 beta for general use: >Small companies can prerelease products, give out early >samples, and discuss future plans because they desperately >need publicity and attention. Large companies (Apple, IBM, Ford, etc.) can't risk having their reputation soiled >unnecessarily, or being held to an early, imprecise >announcement. He's right. Apple won't release a bug-ridden beta version. They'll wait until the final version to release a bug-ridden product (shades of 6.0) :-) Sorry, I couldn't resist. "To me, happiness is being famous in your financial ability to indulge in every kind of excess." -- Calvin fnordfordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnordfnord