Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!well!dsmall
From: dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: Shareware Mac
Message-ID: <14883@well.UUCP>
Date: 9 Dec 89 23:42:25 GMT
References: <641@nixpbe.UUCP> <1989Nov26.172437.10709@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> <6997@portia.Stanford.EDU> <5466@orca.WV.TEK.COM> <3268@brazos.Rice.edu> <2716@infmx.UUCP> <3352@brazos.Rice.edu> <705@nixpbe.UUCP>
Reply-To: dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 87


Hmmm .. shareware Aladin, eh?

	I'm also surprised to hear that I've been quoted as saying anything
negative about Aladin. The only thing I recall was a comparison between it
and Spectre 128, and that is an apples-and-oranges comparison (no pun meant).
I use the 128K ROMs, and get the benefits of that; Aladin uses the 64's, and
gets the bugs in those. For those that don't know, the reason Spectre runs
all the Mac programs that Aladin can't has nothing to do with our relative
programming skill, etc; it's just the 64K ROMs are obsolete and much software
doesn't run on them.

	I'll say it again -- while the makers of Aladin and I had different
ideas about how things should be done, I feel the Aladin was implemented quite
well according to their vision. I don't happen to agree with the vision, but
I can agree with the competence, ok?

	Since both the MagicSac 6.1 and Aladin 3.0 use 64K ROMs, it is at
least fair to compare them. Both have strong and weak points. The Aladin does
a superior job with serial ports (SERD) by far! The Magic Sac doesn't
require a patcher program to "fix up" Mac programs before running them.
And so forth and so on ... by the time you end up comparing strong and weak
points, I think they come out equal -overall-, more or less.

	The Magic Sac at one time sold for $149. The price declined to
$79, then to $49, in ads in START magazine. I am repeatedly told that the
unitit now offered at $40, $20, or free with purchase of Translator.
Essentially, that's the U.S. market for a 64K ROM based Mac emulator.
And it's my opinion that the Aladin-shareware will meet much the same
response, alas.

	It's too easy to slip into the "features trap", when in reality both
Magic Sac and Aladin are "icing" on the ROM "cake". The truth is, using
64K ROMs automatically breaks a large amount of Mac software. Even Apple
doesn't support them anymore; they gave up fixing bugs on bugs. Very
quickly, Hypercard, Quark X-Press, MacWrite 5 & II, MacPaint 2, MultiFinder,
Systems & Finders past Finder 5.3 / System 3.2 (obsolete in anyone's book;
we're at Finder 6.1 / System 6.0.4 now), CDEV's, Adobe Illustrator, Aldus
Freehand ... well, I could fill up a few pages with this, but I think I've
made my point. Apple and its developers have abandoned the 1983 64K ROMs,
and with good reason.

	These programs are what make a Mac into a useful tool that people are
wiling to spend money for. To me, it is irrelevant that Aladin does a nicer
job on the serial port, or RESET button, or whatever, if it won't run the
software I want to run. The icing on the cake doesn't matter, be it Magic Sac,
Aladin, or chocolate.

	At the moment, I feel the state of the art in Mac emulation, on both
Amiga and ST, is a 128K ROM emulator that is capable of directly read/writing
Mac disks. Things have progressed a long way since the original 64K ROM
emulators debuted in 1986.

	I do hope that if this product is made availabl as shareware, that
people do not expect it to do what Spectre / AMAX can -- and thus end up
turned off to the newer products. 

	As for Apple, I've always been square with them, and they've
treated me with the same courtesy. There's nothing to tell there that hasn't
been told sixty times -- we agreed not to name the product MacCartridge and
not to sell Mac ROMs. (Now, if you want to look at something *interesting*,
delve into the court documents surrounding the origins on the Microsoft-Apple
look&feel lawsuit; Data Pacific's name is all over them. I think they are
online on BIX; at least, I was sent them from there.)

	If I may ask -- can the story of the development of Aladin be told?
I remember the name Mathias Greve, and something about two brothers who
did the original product; I'm not familiar with the shareware offerer's
name. I'd like to hear it if you'd care to tell it. 

	Again, if you'll check through several interviews and articles,
you'll find I have said good things about Aladin -- and that I've maintained
that comparing 64K ROMs to 128K ROMs is unfair. And I thought doing sound
through the parallel port was really a neat idea; the overhead of doing it
through the sound chip was pretty hairy.

	Anyway, I guess that's my comment on the "shareware Mac". Please,
be very careful, for your own sakes, that Apple is aware that you're not
putting ROMs on disk and don't allow EPROMS. And be very very careful of
"derivative work" issues surrounding patching software to run on the Aladin,
ok? There's some real minefields there to be cautious of.

	If any of the makers of Aladin ever make it to Denver, please
give me a call, okay? Let's go get a beer.


	-- thanks, Dave Small / "I drink Foster's, personally / Gadgets