Backwards compatibility, was Re: RAID with Disk ][

[dog_cow@macgui.com (D Finnigan)]

Simon D. Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2010, D Finnigan wrote:
> 
>> But then again, this is the Apple: if we didn't mind in-built
>> hinderances and hardware limitations, we'd have upgraded to the Mac years
>> ago. :-)
> 
> Because Macs have never suffered from in-built hinderances and hardware 
> limitations?
>

They just come out with a new model of Mac-- problem solved. We Apple II
users are stuck with what we're given. Being a slave to
backwards-compatibility is what did it, IMO.

However, it's an interesting discussion point on its own. From my own
opinion, the Mac was better architected from the beginning. Not giving
everyone direct access to the hardware and instead providing a tool box was
the main improvement. When the Power PC Macs came out in 1994 running at the
slowest speed of 60 MHz, even original Mac software from the 80's would
still run, as long as it was coded to Apple's Guidelines. Of course, there
were people who used undocumented entry points into the Macintosh Toolbox,
as well as those who accessed the hardware directly, or made assumptions
about RAM/screen size/etc and that software of course would not run on newer
Mac hardware.

-- 
Mac GUI Vault - A source for retro Apple II and Macintosh
computing.
http://macgui.com/vault/