Re: Apple Drops Backward Compatibility for Next MacOS

[shack@deimos.frii.com (Randy Shackelford)]

In article <53mcb6$87f@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
Shane <zatezalo.2@osu.edu> wrote:
>George Van Treeck <treeck@sybase.com> wrote:
>
>>Luci Ellis wrote:
>>>   The article quotes Hancock as saying "If we have to pick between
>>>   backward compatibility and new functions, we're voting for new
>>>   functions." As amplified through wire service stories and untold
>>>   generations of mailing list and Usenet postings, the popular
>>>   perception now seems to be that Apple has said _no_ current
>>>   Macintosh programs will run under Mac OS 8.
>>> 
>>>   That's simply untrue, and understanding why is not much of an
>>>   intellectual exercise. Apple would be committing corporate suicide
>>>   if _all_ existing Macintosh software ceased to operate under
>>>   future versions of the Mac OS...
>
>>You don't know what your are talking about.  Was the Mac compatible
>>with the Apple II? No!!!
>
>>Many computer vendors have come out with new computers and operating
>>systems completely incompatable the previous generation -- with
>>no ill effects.  They simply continue to support the old versions
>>until the demand becomes so small it's no longer profitable.
>>For example, Apple supported the Apple II for many years after
>>the first Macs shipped.
>
>Ah, but Apple *killed* the II - the demand never dropped. And if you
>think Apple came out of it w/ no ill-effects, just go visit
>comp.sys.apple2 for a bit.

Yeah, Apple incurred the wrath of a couple dozen piss-and-moaners who hang
out there and bitch about it, while other people understand that a machine
based on an 8 bit processor dating from the '70s has little viability in
the '90s. Apple came out with other products to remain competitive.

I was talking to some wintel jockeys at work the other day and mentioned that
the current Mac system software still runs on a Mac which debuted in '86.
This brought sneers and a line about how they wouldn't want to run an OS which
can run on something that old. Such is the mindset of the computer buying
public. Apple would be long dead and forgotten if they still only had 6502 
boxes. 

Some people seem to think that Apple could still sell Apple IIs if they still
made 'em. Imagine yourself at an Apple dealer, looking at say a Powermac 8500
and an Apple II sitting side by side. Take a wild guess which box will attract
the attention of John Q. Computerbuyer. Some say a 50 mHz, 32 mb, Apple II
with this or that feature would sell. When Mr. Computerbuyer asks if it will
run Mac software and is told it will not, then asks if it runs windows soft-
ware and is told it will not, and then, flabbergasted, asks just what exactly
it does run and gets a blank stare from Joe Salesdroid, just imagine how many
would sell.

People who still like/use Apple IIs should keep right on using Apple IIs if
they get the job done for them, but not bitch and gripe because Apple had to
come out with more up to date products. Apple supported 'em for far longer
than any computer company has supported old products.
-- 
Randy Shackelford                                 
shack@frii.com