Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!ucrmath!rhyde
From: rhyde@ucrmath.ucr.edu (randy hyde)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: CRCs
Message-ID: <14194@ucrmath.ucr.edu>
Date: 6 May 91 07:04:54 GMT
References: <8866@crash.cts.com> <1074@stewart.UUCP>
Organization: University of California, Riverside
Lines: 25

>>>>
What a joke.  If you want the application to run on your computer AT ALL,
you'd better care about portability.
<<<<

I write lots of device drivers for PCs.  I can promise you they are not
portable.  They work fine on my computer.  I don't care if they're
portable to a Mac or an Apple II.

There is a big problem with portable "Applications."  In general, they have
to be written to the lowest common denominator.  I'm sorry, but people have
been arguing this once one microcomputers since the TRS-80 vs. Apple II days.
The non-portable products always won out in the marketplace.  Even Word Perfect
(who has ported their application to more diverse systems than anyone else
I know of) doesn't write portable software.  They've written specific
versions for each platform.

Most people won't spend a lot of money on application which barely run on
a machine (i.e., AT ALL).  They want those applications to take advantage of
the features of the machine.  Look at how many people around here who are
complaining because software vendors only support generic Apple II computers
and don't support the gee whiz features of the GS.  Hey, it's portable if it
runs on the II.  That doesn't make GS owners very happy.  They'll buy such
products grudingly, if at all.
*** RAndy Hyde