Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.misc:10359 comp.sys.mac.system:3878 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!linac!att!princeton!bonnet!bskendig From: bskendig@bonnet.Princeton.EDU (Brian Kendig) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: Will the bugs in 6.0.7 be fixed (i.e. will there be a 6.0.8)? Message-ID: <7720@idunno.Princeton.EDU> Date: 30 Mar 91 18:29:13 GMT References: <1991Mar30.172229.193@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> Sender: news@idunno.Princeton.EDU Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.misc Organization: Starfleet Academy: Princeton University Lines: 66 In article <1991Mar30.172229.193@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> rob@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert K Shull) writes: >In article yee@osf.org (Michael K. Yee) writes: >So, "Apple Computer Said" 6.0.7 is known to be buggy. Who at Apple Computer? >I mean, this is real close to the nebulous "They Said" that we hear so much. >Name names, or at least positions. Not "Highly Placed Sources." >Not "Well Informed Individuals." Not "Persons In Authority." Otherwise, it's >just another urban legend. An `urban legend' backed up by dozens upon dozens of people here on UseNet. >There's only one bug in 6.0.7 that I've seen (the occasional loss of mouse-up) >and that exists in 6.0.5 as well. That seems to be a problem with the hardware, since it's only been reported (to my knowledge) with the IIsi and the LC. >I've been running 6.0.7 on my Mac II since the day it was placed on apple.com. >Needless to say, my wife has been running it on her IIsi since the day it >arrived. We've been running it on all of the IIx's, SE's, and SE/30's here >for the last 2 months. We have yet to find ANY incompatibilities with the >commercial software we use. Running vanilla 6.0.7 on my SE with no INITs other than what was put on my hard drive with the Installer, I had all sorts of spurious crashes with MacWrite II, Microsoft Word, SuperPaint, and a slew of other programs that had behaved fine under 6.0.5. I'm not sure why this was happening, but when I moved up to 7.0b1, the spurious crashes ended. >And, of course, there are the problems that are blamed on Apple, and their >software in particular, by other companies. Like the brain-dead programmers >who assumed 68020/30->coprocessor, instead of checking SysEnvirons, then >blamed Apple for the problem. Apple once told developers that they could safely assume any 020- or 030-based Macintosh would have a math coprocessor in it. Apparently they warned people about their change in policy while they were designing the LC and IIsi, but by then people were already using applications which assumed the coprocessor. >If System 7 IS coming out mid-May, I certainly hope it IS true. May 13, according to MacLeak. But, of course, if they find it needs more work, this date will be pushed back. Apple's not making any promises right now -- but wouldn't you prefer to have a bug-free System? >> incompatible with more software, etc. etc. etc. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >This you can bet on. Just like every release in the last 7 years. >But I've got software that dates back to 1984 that works just fine >on my wife's IIsi. Software can be written correctly. It's just easier >not to. As I keep saying: there are many programs which died for me miserably under 6.0.7, and even a few that didn't work under 6.0.5, that work with varying degrees of success under 7.0. They're doing a good job with it. << Brian >> | Brian S. Kendig \ Macintosh | Engineering, | bskendig | | Computer Engineering |\ Thought | USS Enterprise | @phoenix.Princeton.EDU | Princeton University |_\ Police | -= NCC-1701-D =- | @PUCC.BITNET | "It's not that I don't HAVE the work to *do* -- I don't DO the work I *have*."