Re: Randy's inherent hate of Apple IIs

[shack@onyx.southwind.net (Randy Shackelford)]

Nathan Mates (nathan@visi.com) wrote:

:    Randy, with such blindsided and stupid opinions as to what the
: Apple II can do, why do you bother sticking around here? It sure as
: heck ain't the processor which limits the design of GS/OS to not have
: a good clean API between the OS, the FST and the drivers. Because
: you're so blinded by your unfailing devotion to the fruity logo,
: you're coming up with stupid excuse after stupid excuse blaming the
: processor, the times, everything BUT what is clearly at fault for
: the FSTs being too tighly integrated with the OS: Apple. 

You're the one who mentioned Linux right? Is there a 6500 version of Linux?
Why not do you suppose? If you don't see that 6500 processors have their 
limits, you're stuck in the '70s or something. 

:    I am not blinded by a love of Apple or any other setup. Everything
: has failures, and the best thing to do is admit them and hopefully fix
: them. Randy, once again, you're making totally stupid statements while
: bending over like a contortionist to never say anything bad about
: Apple. One of these days, hopefully you'll wake up from the
: mindwashing program you appear to have undergone and realize just how
: stupid you've been acting.

I wonder what Dave Lyons, Andy Nicholas, et al would think about your
evaluation of their software design expertise. I don't think they'd take
kindly to it. I'll just bet that there is a reason why FSTs are tightly
coupled to the operating system code that doesn't presume crappy design
of the system.

Finally, if you don't think I ever say anything bad about Apple, look in
dajanews and see what I have to say about the disappearance of the AAUI
port from G3 Powermacs, or how Internet Address Detectors, Quicktime MPEG,
and Mac OS Runtime for Java are native only. And while you're at it,
eat shit.
--
Offsite mail to this host gets nuked.