Re: Apple Drops Backward Compatibility for Next MacOS

[pubpc1@library.ucla.edu]

nathan@visi.com (Nathan Mates) wrote:
>   What bugs most people is not the lack of Apple II support *now*
>(when it's far less of an issue)

Exactly.  The Apple II of today is more the Pentium PC than the Mac.
The Pentium has lots of slots and is expandable and Windows 95 has
the functionality of the GS interface.

Apple had a winner with the GS, it ignored it and so it is in trouble
today.

The funny thing is that just when the Mac was getting good, they are
going to abandon their user base AGAIN.  Plain stupid.  They could
at least provide Mac users with an upgrade option.  A trade-in, like
the one that never materialized for Apple II users!


>but lack of support when (1) Macs
>came out, and (2) when the GS came out. When the GS is outselling
>macs, despite near zero publicity and advertising, you'd have to be a
>technology dweeb with your head up your *** to not try and support it.

They purposefully killed a successful product.


>
>   Apple's position on the Apple II has been "thank you for buying
>that machine; let's go do something else." since the time of the Apple
>III in 1980. Despite constant alienation, Apple IIs were widely
>popular beyond anyone at Apple's comprehension, and they've endured.
>Some form of bridge (such as a //e card for the Mac SE or whatever)
>would have done wonders for narrowing the gap, but that never
>happened.

If they never came out with the GS and the Mac could run //e software
from day one till now, then that would make sense.

Backward compatibility was the key.  It is no wonder that PCs are so
successful.

>
>--
><*> Nathan Mates http://www.visi.com/~nathan/      <*>
># What are the facts? Again and again and again-- what are the _facts_?
># Shun wishful thinking, avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors
># think-- what are the facts, and to how many decimal places?  -R.A. Heinlein