Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!samsung!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!hoptoad!tim
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Tail patches
Message-ID: <9054@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: 22 Nov 89 15:21:42 GMT
References: <5249@internal.Apple.COM> <17090@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU> <5292@internal.Apple.COM> <1989Nov20.182741.2658@eng.umd.edu> <5320@internal.Apple.COM> <1989Nov21.040138.344@eng.umd.edu> <21353@brunix.UUCP>
Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney)
Organization: Eclectic Software, San Francisco
Lines: 15

In article <21353@brunix.UUCP> ejd@iris.brown.edu (Ed Devinney) writes:
>   Jeeeezzzuss, guys...when did Apple (aside from Steve Jobs maybe) claim that 
>the Mac family would be upward-compatible forever?  And if they did, when
>were you gullible enough to believe them?

When Apple instituted compatibility guidelines which were supposed to
insure binary upward compatibility, that's when.  Applications on the
Mac are *not* supposed to require periodic recompilation.  Perhaps you
have MacOS confused with minicomputer operating systems like UNIX and
VMS.
-- 
Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com

"Americans will buy anything, as long as it doesn't cross the thin line
 between cute and demonic." -- Ian Shoales