Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!purdue!bu-cs!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!reed!kamath
From: kamath@reed.UUCP (Sean Kamath)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Living in the Past
Message-ID: <9703@reed.UUCP>
Date: 28 Jun 88 05:44:26 GMT
References: <1804@bucsb.UUCP>
Reply-To: kamath@reed.UUCP (Sean Kamath)
Organization: Reed College, Portland OR
Lines: 103

Yo, big flame ahead. Poor starving student ahead. (well, now I have a job.)

In article <1804@bucsb.UUCP> shack@bucsb.UUCP (Randy Shackelford) writes:
>I cannot get over people who refuse to stay current.

Jesus people like you really piss me off.  *really*.

>						      For instance, I got
>the //e enhancement in May '85, about two days after I found out such a
>thing existed. Being able to input Applesoft and monitor commands in
>lowercase and boot the machine from a hard disk or RAM disk and have efficient
>80 column firmware was just too tempting for me, so I was among the first
>to run my machine down to my friendly dealer and have my buggy old firmware
>exchanged for good new firmware.

Hmm.  I waited until I could scroung up the money.  See, $75 is half what I
pay for rent.  It's interesting that you waited so long to be able to use
lowercase.  Most people I know had patches DOS to do convertions on the
fly.  This allowed AppleSoft to think you had entered everything in
Uppercase.  But it doesn't matter.

>				  (It was also at this time that I gave up
>using DOS software; forsaking the old and embracing the new is a job not to be
>done half-heartedly.)

As I recall, Apple officially introduced ProDOS a lot sooner than the
upgrade.  Like, when they introduced the //c.  Now, I though you always
rushed out to get the latest?  Or was it that as soon as ProDOS came out,
there really weren't a whole lot of programs that used the buggy original
ProDOS?  Or did you have attachments to DOS 3.3 software?  Do tell.

>In my IIgs (purchased in March '87 - the first opportunity I had to get one)

Great.  At the rate I'm going, I should be able to afford one sometime in
March 1990.  Let's not forget my student lone.

>I also got the ROM upgrade at the first opportunity (not right away, as the 
>only dealer in the area who even knew there was an upgrade at first only
>upgraded machines sold by that dealer.) This upgrade added several nifty
>features too, such as a built in monitor desk accessory. I cannot believe 
>there are still people out there - in mid 1988 - that still do not have the 
>enhancement. Much less the IIgs upgrade, since it was FREE. 

the IIgs upgrade was not free.  The ROM upgrade was, as was the VGC fix.  If
the IIgs upgrade is free, please supply me with one.  Thank you.

I do agree that people should keep current with version of programs
(including such things as ProDOS and system software, which are *so*
important.), esp. if it's a free upgrade.  There is generally no reason not
to, and it can really cause problems.  In this sense, yes, I get confused
too as to why people don't upgrade.

>My point is, I APPLAUD developers who require that their software be run on
>up-to-date hardware.

Alright, turkey, you really put your mouth in it this time. Let's just
imagine that you put in code specifically designed to make your software
*not* run on anything *old*.  Are you gonna supply updates to *everyone* for
*free* because they upgraded their hardware?  No, you'd make them buy it,
since you obviously feel if you own a computer, you're made out of money.
But as a company, you might just damn well find out you ain't selling sh*t.

>		      I got my //e in August '83, and at the time, every 
>program available ran on the ][+, meaning they took advantage of no features
>of my machine, such as double hires, lowercase characters, and up-down arrow
>keys. It took years until any useful program required a 128k enhanced //e or
>newer machine, which is the way it should be, since, after all, it is mid 
>1988.

Yeah, write dude, why don't you write some code for a change?  Ever try
double high res?  Esp. Since *every* developer //e couldn't use it, not that
anyone had even though of it.  There's such thing as development time.  And
the more sophisticated the software, the longer that wait.  Look how long
it's taken for decent macware -- and none of it runs on the original 128K
mac (and they don't even make it anymore.)

>By the way: if anyone decides to flame me because I am an elitist or for any
>other reason you think you might have from reading the previous, be aware that
>I know the cost of staying current; my IIgs is fifteen months old, and I still
>owe money on it. Also, it has had SIX different motherboards in it. I am the
>Apple service person's worst nightmare. I would recount my long history of 
>hardware problems, but that would in itself be an entire article...

Yes, I decided to flame you anyway.  I know people like you, they kept
coming in.  When they had a problem, I fixed it.  And you really aren't
their worst nightmare.  They get paid for doing it.  Your Apple's worst
nightmare.  And the dealers delight.  If you expect us all to go out and
hock everything we own to stay current, force manufacturers and software
companies to make their software only run on the *latest* and *greatest*,
you can damn well bet that the computer will go the way of the Edsel.

>Randy Shackelford   shack@bucsb.bu.edu

Sean Kamath

PS, I don' want to talk about this anymore on the net, so e-mail me hate
mail if you wish.  Better yet, send me a GS, and I guarantee that I won't
mention this for at least one year, or until they come out with a new //.

-- 
UUCP:  {decvax allegra ucbcad ucbvax hplabs ihnp4}!tektronix!reed!kamath
CSNET: reed!kamath@Tektronix.CSNET  ||  BITNET: reed!kamath@PSUVAX1.BITNET
ARPA:  reed!kamath@PSUVAX1.CS.PSU.EDU
US Snail: 3934 SE Boise, Portland, OR  97202-3126 (I hate 4 line .sigs!)