Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!seismo!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!f.gp.cs.cmu.edu!dtw
From: dtw@f.gp.cs.cmu.edu.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: MacApp Sources...
Message-ID: <20@f.gp.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 9-Dec-86 18:59:46 EST
Article-I.D.: f.20
Posted: Tue Dec  9 18:59:46 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Dec-86 03:19:06 EST
References:  <364@apple.UUCP>
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 16
Keywords: MacApp Professional Developers


| MPW and MacApp are not intended for everyone.  They are simply other
| alternatives for Macintosh programmers.  I think that other third party
| products address the needs of the "kitchen-table" developers very well,
| while MPW and MacApp address the needs of professional developers.
| 
| We would like to make MacApp available in other development systems, and
| have been working with third parties to make this happen.

I don't understand why "professional" developers need MPW and MacApp and
"kitchen-table" developers don't.  No third party products provide the high
level of support for the Mac user interface as does MacApp.  If the
"professional" needs this level of support, then why doesn't the "kitchen-
table" developer?  Is it that the "kitchen-table" developers are smarter,
better programmers?  Or is it that Apple just doesn't care about them,
because they are less likely to directly help Apple sell Macs?