Appleworks GS V2.0

[jthielen@VNET.IBM.COM (James A. Thielen - Schaumburg, Il.)]

Attached is a response from Quality Computers regarding the Appleworks GS
v2.0 issue.  It is lenghty but clears up what is going on and their
posistion on the Apple IIs.  I would like to thank Quality for sending
this to me and setting things straight.

Jim

*******************************************************************************
Received: from relay2.geis.com by vnet.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
   Tue, 21 Jun 94 19:11:04 EDT
Received: by relay2.geis.com
	(1.37.109.10G/15.6) id AA138580290; Tue, 21 Jun 1994 23:11:30 GMT
From: quality@genie.geis.com
Message-Id: <199406212311.AA138580290@relay2.geis.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 94 22:51:00 UTC
To: jthielen@vnet.ibm.com
Subject: AWGS 2.0
X-Genie-Id: 8134076
X-Genie-From: QUALITY



 > Is Appleworks GS v2.0 still being pursued?  If not, I think offering a
 > product for sale ( spring issue of Enhanced ) and then stop development
 > of it is a cruel way to treat your clients.

Regreftully, I must be the bearer of bad news.  AppleWorks GS 2.0 is indeed
cancelled.  Let me send you a post from Jerry Kindall that is more or less
the official word.


---
Here's the short version. The reason AppleWorks GS 2.0 has been canceled is
inadequate source code and development documentation. A more detailed
explanation (somewhat technical) follows.

When we took over AppleWorks and AppleWorks GS, we assumed that updating
AppleWorks GS was going to be a fairly straightforward task. Unfortunately,
we were wrong.  The source code for AWGS is 7 megabytes in size.  Those who
have seen it have called it the most poorly organized and documented source
code they've ever laid eyes on.  Claris was unable to provide us with any
form of documentation for the source code, nor were they able to provide us
with their official bug list.

The source code was designed to build under an old version of MPW
(Macintosh Programmer's Workshop).  I have it on good authority that even
the old MPW wasn't actually capable of compiling the source code as it was
provided to us; it seems likely that it was compiled in pieces and then
patched together by hand.  We did not receive any documentation on this
process -- in fact, there probably never was any.

To give you an idea of how bad the AWGS source was, consider that it took
Jim Merritt, who we originally contracted to lead the project, four months
just to get the source code Claris sent us to produce an executable version
of AppleWorks GS 1.1.  Even then, the program was not 100% byte-for-byte
identical with the shipping version because of the hand-patching which was
used in the original version.

Jim Merritt, as you may know, is no slouch.  He's the one who, working at
Apple, coordinated the development of the IIGS System 5 Finder, among other
things.  The original plan was for Merritt to divide the program among
several programmers (of his choosing) and have them work on the project
independently. Merritt would be responsible for coordinating things and
making sure all the program segments could be combined into a fully
functional program.

This turned out to be an impossibility, because the source code simply was
not arranged in any coherent fashion.  I've been told that there are
sections of the AppleWorks GS source code which exist mainly because nobody
knows exactly what they do -- Claris was afraid that removing them would
cause the program to stop working!

At around the same time another programmer decided he wanted a shot at it.
This programmer was Bill Heineman, author of Harmonie, Out Of This World,
and other programs, and renowned around the IIGS world as an extremely
competent programmer.  As the weeks went by, we realized that it was beyond
his abilities, as well.

A third team, led by Steve Disbrow, also had a look at AWGS. After spending
a few weeks with the source code, Disbrow recommended to us that we scrap
it and rewrite the entire AWGS application from scratch.  This is, for
obvious reasons, an economic impossibility.  So, after almost ten months of
effort by the top programmers in the IIGS world, we have concluded that the
task of creating a major upgrade is a near-impossible one.

While we are continuing to investigate ways of providing an upgrade to
AppleWorks GS, we feel it is unfair to hold orders for a product which, at
this point, we can't promise to deliver.  Rather than keep everyone holding
their breath, we have decided to notify our customers that the project has
been canceled.  If the project gets going again, we will let everyone know.
We just don't want to get anyone's hopes up.

This was not an easy decision for anyone here -- not just because we're now
going to have hordes of angry customers calling us, but because this
company WAS founded on the Apple II, and that computer remains special to
many of us. Furthermore, as part of our contract with Claris to take over
AWGS, we made a royalty guarantee, which basically means we're going to owe
Claris a few hundred thousand dollars out-of-pocket if we don't release
AWGS 2.0.

Some of you have already told us you will never buy anything from us again
because you feel betrayed by our actions.  That's certainly your privilege.
Still, I think that if you stop to consider the situation, you'll realize
that the main reason you're angry at us is that we got your hopes up --
which is something Claris certainly never did.  (If we had left the program
in Claris' hands, do you suppose THEY would have produced an upgrade?)  We
gave it our best shot.  We've done everything we could (more than most
companies) to support Apple II users.  Some of you may see it differently.

If you have AWGS 2.0 on order, you will receive a notice by U.S. Mail
confirming the situation as I have outlined it here.  Thank you for your
patience and support throughout our attempt to develop this upgrade.

One final note.  In an RTC (which Harold mentioned) I referred to a
specific programmer as being unable to deliver the product on time. Harold
did not mention this person's name, which I'm thankful for, but I still owe
this programmer an apology.  In fact, it's possible that any or all of the
programmers who worked on AWGS 2.0 might think I was referring to them.  It
was certainly not the fault of any programmer; every one of them gave it
their all.  My comments in the RTC were based on incomplete information and
a sense of frustration.  My apologies.

Jerry




Quality Computers --- Power for performance