Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!usc!apple!apple.com!chewy
From: chewy@apple.com (Paul Snively)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: How to Argue Technical Points (was Re: Tail patches)
Message-ID: <5432@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 27 Nov 89 22:41:29 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 86
References:<5212@internal.Apple.COM> <32982@mirror.UUCP> <5248@internal.Apple.COM> <9012@hoptoad.uucp> <5296@internal.Apple.COM> <9041@hoptoad.uucp> <5352@internal.Apple.COM> <9090@hoptoad.uucp>

In article <9090@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
> In article <5352@internal.Apple.COM> chewy@apple.com (Paul Snively) 
writes:
> >I'd be more than happy to continue the 
> >discussion, although I believe it will be much easier when System 7 
final 
> >ships, since at that point the details of the Alias Manager, et al. 
will 
> >be much clearler.
> 
> In other words, we don't care what comments you might have on the
> merits of this new feature.  It's going in the new system anyway and it
> will be just the way it always was going to be; just keep your
> suggestions to yourself and let us tell you how things are.

Well, that might be your interpretation of the statement.  All it really 
means is that, as was pointed out by people other than myself here long 
ago, the concerns that you raised regarding non-Macintosh file servers 
with respect to file IDs actually are being addressed.  The problem is 
that documentation specifying exactly what non-Macintosh AFP servers 
should do to support file IDs isn't currently available.

In article <9090@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
> It's obvious that at no time do the Apple representatives consider the
> dialogue with the developer community to be two-way.  Any criticism or
> complaint that may be raised is there to be waved aside, not to be
> taken into account as a possible influence on future software
> directions.

This may be obvious to you, but it's certainly not obvious to the various 
developers to whom Apple has talked and whose comments and criticisms 
actually HAVE made a noticeable (to them, as well as to others) impact on 
our software.  A particularly good example of an evolved piece of software 
from one revision to another based on third-party feedback is MacApp.

In article <9090@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
> Tim:
> >and people are coming
> >to ignore your conclusions even in the very rare cases where you
> >sincerely try to prove them correct.
> 
> Paul:
> >For whom exactly are you speaking?  So far, you're the only one making 
> >these claims.
> 
> False.  I've received an e-mail message from a person who mentioned
> making exactly the same complaints about you here, with the same level
> of non-response.  And as I already pointed out, a number of people have
> commented here on the failure of your messages to adequately address
> issues like exactly why tail patches are wrong, the non-run-time nature
> of library code, and the binding nature of instructions in Inside
> Macintosh, as well as my points on problems with file ids.  I guess
> you've blocked these people's messages from your mind; inconvenient,
> aren't they?

Well, Tim, all I can say is that I've received several EMails saying 
precisely the same thing about you; where does THAT get us?

I have explained why tail patching is incorrect programming on the 
Macintosh, as has Larry.  I can reiterate if anyone is still unclear.  The 
"non-run-time nature of library code" is a non-sequitur; others here have 
also pointed out why software updates when using any library code are 
sometimes necessary.  "The binding nature of instructions in Inside 
Macintosh" is still another non-sequitur; if it weren't there would be no 
Tech Notes supplementing or revising Inside Macintosh.  As if that weren't 
enough, Inside Macintosh will be on CD-ROM soon, in stack form, which will 
hopefully be updated at least as regularly as the Tech Note stack is.

There isn't anything that hasn't been addressed multiple times, including 
technically.  The fact that the answers aren't what you want to hear is 
what's preventing you from recognizing that the issues have actually been 
dealt with.

In article <9090@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) writes:
> Adults do not act in loco parentis to other
> adults, except as a way of expressing contempt.

That's a perfectly valid expression of opinion, couched in the form of a 
statement of fact.  As such, it is also completely illusory.

__________________________________________________________________________
Just because I work for Apple Computer, Inc. doesn't mean that they 
believe what I believe or vice-versa.
__________________________________________________________________________
C++ -- The language in which only friends can access your private members.
__________________________________________________________________________