Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!crash!ryptyde!dant
From: dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: De-macification of the Amiga (Re: The Amiga's Future)
Keywords: Drag-and-drop, application start, programm changes
Message-ID: <111@ryptyde.UUCP>
Date: 24 Jun 91 10:27:44 GMT
References: <1991Jun21.134801.19644@ifi.unizh.ch> <1991Jun22.021136.315@Sugar.NeoSoft.com> <96@ryptyde.UUCP> <1991Jun23.145847.16816@Sugar.NeoSoft.com>
Reply-To: dant@ryptyde.UUCP (Daniel Tracy)
Organization: Ryptyde Timesharing (ryptyde.cts.com)
Lines: 15

Responding to the following:

"No. I suppose you could use a kludge to give the appearance of having them
do this. Personally, I'd rather not install such a prop and force application
programmers to update their code. The fewer kludges added in the name of
backwards compatibility the better... that's the philosophy that's held the
Mac back so badly."

Excuse me? Are you flaming Apple for being able to do something Commodore
couldn't? That is, cause applications to open documents by double-clicking
on them even if the app is running, without apps having to be rewritten?
There is no "appearance" of them having done this. What do you mean?
Holography? :)  That's just it, the Workbench way DOES force programmers
to update their code, while Apple's doesn't. What's the disadvantage?
What is your point, if you have one?