Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!ndsuvm1!mtus5!applerep
From: APPLEREP@MTUS5.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: 2.0 development--opinion
Message-ID: <90334.191242APPLEREP@MTUS5.BITNET>
Date: 1 Dec 90 00:12:42 GMT
References: <1990Nov29.193346.12451@ccad.uiowa.edu>
Organization: Computing Technology Services, Michigan Technological Univ.
Lines: 21

The thing that I worry about with HC 2.0 is just how widespread its acceptance
will be with the users -- the people that I would like to use any stack that I
produce.  Yes, I know that people that purchase new CPUs all have HC 2.0, but
I am sure that most of the Macintosh owners out there have not even heard that
it exists.  When they do find out about it (most likely when they try to use
a 2.0 stack on their old version of HC), I wonder how many will be willing to
shell out the 49 greenbacks?

So if I write a program, and want to make a nice help stack to go along with
it, do I create it with HC 2.0 or 1.2.5?  I guess that it depends if I want
to make a stack that has nice features, or one that everyone will be able to
use (without the hassle of purchasing an upgrade).

Mind you, I am not talking about us Netters, or the User Group members.  These
are great organizations that I feel users should belong to, but the reality
is that we are the exception, not the rule.

Tom Amberg
Michigan Tech--Way, way up in the Great White North,
============================= where gas has always been expensive
============================= even before Saddam (and recently Congress).