Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:40631 comp.sys.mac.programmer:9865
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!santra!kampi.hut.fi!jmunkki
From: jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: 11 New Features
Keywords: 11's,New,Features,Update
Message-ID: <25897@santra.UUCP>
Date: 20 Oct 89 22:44:49 GMT
References: <969@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM> <25744@santra.UUCP> <974@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM> <14138@well.UUCP>
Sender: news@santra.UUCP
Reply-To: jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Lines: 40

In article <14138@well.UUCP> svc@well.UUCP (Leonard Rosenthol) writes:
>In article <25744@santra.UUCP> jmunkki@kampi.hut.fi (Juri Munkki) writes:
>>I couldn't find the magic words "Communication Toolbox" anywhere in the
>>announcement. I guess version 11 will be obsolete when it ships... Every
>>decent communications application should support the Comm Toolbox. Of
>>course it should be an option, but it should be there.
>
>	Why would ANY program become obsolete once the ComToolbox ships?? 
>White Knight 11.0, MicroPhone II v3.0, SmartCom II 3.1, etc. all are very nice
>software packages for doing telecommunications and just because Apple has put
>otu this thing for making telecom easier to program CERTAINLY does NOT
>obsolete it!  

Maybe "obsolete" was too strong, but...
>	Is my program obsolete because I ddid my own tear off menus, but System
>7.0 will have it built in??  Actually for many people they will find the above
>mentioned products MUCH better than the intial CTB compatible p9roducts since
>they features things that are not yet avail fo the CTB such as ZMODEM, QuickB,
>VT102 print logging, and SCRIPTING!!

Why would the toolbox compatible applications lack the features you mentioned?
Who says that you can't combine your own code with the toolbox routines? The
sample application that comes with the beta release is only a sample. The real
applications will have all the features you mentinoned _and_ they will support
all toolbox compatible protocols and emulators.

What would you say, if an MS-DOS programmer said:
  "We wrote our own windowing routines and we access the chips directly. It
works great on all our PCs. Why would you want run our program under Windows
and why do you insist that we use netbios for communicating?"

Most users will keep on buying these program because they can't immediately
see what is wrong with them. The programs will work on standard machines,
but will probably break on something nonstandard.


_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._
|     Juri Munkki jmunkki@hut.fi  jmunkki@fingate.bitnet        I Want   Ne   |
|     Helsinki University of Technology Computing Centre        My Own   XT   |
^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^