Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixb.cc.columbia.edu!wln
From: wln@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (William L Nussbaum)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: System 7 and Mac Plus/SE 68030 upgrades.
Message-ID: <1990Nov24.061423.10096@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 24 Nov 90 06:14:23 GMT
References: <9514@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <1990Nov3.122558.28340@rodan.acs.syr.edu>
Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News)
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 49

In article <1990Nov3.122558.28340@rodan.acs.syr.edu> wwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) writes:

>Well, I'm quite surprised by this statement. My surprise is based upon the 
>already existing Virtual product. The only reason one would require obtaining
>a modified version of this product is due the fact that they LIMITED the
>hardware that could be used with each version for efficiency reasons. It was
>my understanding after having talked with their representative that the
>underlying code changed little (understandably).
>
>So, I wonder what's up with Apple's code that they decided that any '030 
>equipped machine won't support VM. I mean, let's face it; the only problems that
>I've encountered on mine involved software that noticed it was running on an SE
>and assumed an '000. I suppose that this leaves two reasons for Apple's edict
>-- 1) they make hardware assumptions in their code (hard to believe), or 2)
>They want to make sure the low end stays that way (VERY plausible!).

...There's a difference between not enabling VM on a Plus/030 (although the
Control Panel enabling bit for VM will certainly not be set for the Plus, I
[and this is only a guess] expect that if something like that is flipped, it
would work) [note: I have had no exposure to Sys7 yet (nor, actually, to an
030'd plus...)] and not _supporting_ it.  For Apple to allow the user to
enable VM on a Plus/SE with an 030 accelerator without a hack requires that
Apple be able to support it.  I don't know of any business that would make
guarantees that they will work with twenty other brands of product that don't
even comply to any set standard...

>This revelation is also funny. The two main reasons people would be updating to
>7.0 are TrueType and VM. For a reasonable price, both can be had for ANY
>hardware configuration of Mac. I suppose the same will be true enough of
>TrueType (does this mean ATM is unTrueType?), but the seamless integration of VM
>into the System software would have been very nice. I guess this is yet another
>reason for a majority of users NOT to upgrade... especially those lucky new
>owners of Classics and LCs (after 1/91)...

I'd wait until System 7, 7-studly apps, and IAC-aware apps come out to guess
at what people want 7 for, but given that ATM and VM are available, I'd
expect that the majority of people waiting for System 7 are waiting for the
whole suite of features, and not necessarily primarily those two.

I'm really looking forward to the heirarchical-view finder, myself...

>Oh well... there's always System 8.0...

Or, as MacWeek describes, (Nov20, p8) Yogen Dalal, Claris VP of Software
Development, advising 'applications developers thta Unix is the platform
of the future....'   ...Hmmm...

| William Lee Nussbaum, Jr.
| wln@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu