From: hal@budapest.math.macalstr.edu (Harold Byron Bouma)
Subject: Re: The Apple II Now and Forever
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 22:33:32 GMT

Matt Deatherage writes

In article <1fq5vbINNf69@gap.caltech.edu>, toddpw@cco.caltech.edu (Todd P.
Whitesel) wrote:
> 
> Ah yes, the standard "discredit" defense. Matt, when are you going to
> understand that we don't _have_ to have "been there" to reconstruct a lot of
> what happend from the sheer mass of evidence contained in the result? After
> messing with the toolbox for a while, I would tend to agree with Hal's
> assessment, for the most part. I suspect that I am not alone in this.

You don't have to read "Moby Dick" to write a book report on it, either, 
and you're just about as likely to get it right.

	As I see it, if Matt's hypothesis holds true, then all the history  
classes ever taught are invalid! According to Matt, you have to be there to  
know whats really going on. So while all the facts mentioned in class are  
"correct," the why's to events can never be mentioned because no one who  
printed the texts was with the people at the time who made history. We can't  
say why the declartion of independace was written because "gee, we weren't  
there with them to know why they did it" 

	But much of why events happened in history is in reality pieced  
together from research and the collection of data. As new research and data is  
collected from a given event, ideas about it might change, The same can be  
applied anywhere, wheter it be to the Reagan administration to even Apple's  
policies and trends over the past decade.

> > You are perfectly free to contend with any
> > of his suppositions and give the _real_ scoop, you know.
> 
> This is not true.  Unlike folks who may have been in a meeting where there
> were not non-disclosure agreements, I _am_ bound by an employment agreement
> with Apple that gives other people the choice as to what I can and can't
> discuss regarding Apple's internal policies.  I say what I can.
>

	I think Todd was being sarcastic there, Matt. You claim that  
information isn't correct and then hide behind the NDA which prevents you from  
saying anything. We all know that you can't say anything so why even get  
involved? Granted, some of the things that I say you might not agree with, so  
you make a counter point to prove me wrong. its all part of a dicussion. But  
since you can't make the counterpoint, it really makes it into a one sided  
argument.

	Its unfortant that you can't respond Matt, I'd like to know why you  
think differently and from that maybe we both could learn something. But from  
the way it is, nothing can be gained.

> > given the circumstances I think it's truly impressive that the whole thing 
> > came together the way it did. [...] But they cannot change the fundamental 
> > flaws in the IIgs toolbox, and I wish you'd start being more realistic 
> > about them. After all, there is nothing to lose at this point.
> 
> Who's not being realistic?  Hal claimed, or at least strongly implied, that
> the original design team wanted to build in multitasking support and they
> had to jettison it for cost/time reasons.  I don't buy that, and I said so.

	Let me requote what I had said in that artcile:

		"The reason why the GS does not have features like a 	 
	multifinder is because Apple did not let the GS have them. A 	 
	Multifinder for the GS would be expensive for Apple to make right now  
	because back when the GS was being created, many corners were cut in  
	the design of the toolbox for time/budget reasons (also created  
	by Apple). However, just because we do not have them right now doesn't  
	mean that the GS can't do it."

Just because I said that the toolbox had some corners cut doesn't mean I said  
that they had wanted to do multitasking support. I don't see that anywhere up  
there. I'm saying that because some corners were cut, this has made its making  
modifying the toolbox to add features that they did not conceive of back then  
such as a Multifinder difficult. One of the concepts they teach us in class  
here is to be aware that you migh thave to modify your code to handle new  
situations that aren't being asked of now. So we have to make our code  
flexible. And if you've got limitations in time/moeny, you have to cut that  
code flexibility sometimes to achieve these goals. But they did a great job  
with the toolbox given what they had.

| Hal Bouma                            | Send mail to: HBouma@Macalstr.edu    |
| Macalester College, St. Paul, MN.    | and           HBouma@Macalstr.Bitnet |
 \  Things that make you go Hmmm:  System 6, GNO, DreamGrafix, SoundMeister  /
  \  Coming sometime this decade for the //GS : NBA! (GNO compatible too!)  /
   \  Drop by and say hi to us anytime on the #AppleIIGS channel on IRC!!  /