Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mcvax!botter!ark!kleef From: kleef@ark.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Re: PLEASE READ THIS POST Message-ID: <980@ark.cs.vu.nl> Date: Wed, 22-Apr-87 10:20:21 EST Article-I.D.: ark.980 Posted: Wed Apr 22 10:20:21 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 24-Apr-87 02:59:16 EST References: Reply-To: kleef@cs.vu.nl (Patrick van Kleef) Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam Lines: 44 Summary: What kind of nonsense is this? In article rs4u#@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Richard Siegel) writes: > >I've received a number of comments that the Juggler info's also in InfoWorld. > >I would venture to say that someone ELSE violated >their nondisclosure agreement, and the InfoWorld should know >about such things and not publish. > >Whatever... > > --Rich Hey, what's this? I believe there's something like the Freedom of Press, at least in my country there is! If InfoWorld has all the ins and outs of this new phenomena, it's their _duty_ to publish and not their duty to think of Apple's non-disclosure clauses! Whoever 'slipped' the information is responsible for doing so and Apple is 'responsible' for sueing him/her providing the 'leak' is found. Don't run along with computer companies that just love the secrecy about their new products. InfoWorld has a responsibility towards her readers for publishing whatever information it comes across. BTW: On a press conference this morning at the European Mac Expo in Rotterdam, Holland, Larry Tessler (hope I spell that right :) gave some information about the Juggler (how's that for a non-disclosure violation :). He said Juggler is a sort of marriage between the Switcher and Servant. It uses parts of the Servant code. It has facilities to have certain processes (like datacommunication or printing) running in the background. He emphasized that applications can assign a _part_ of their program as a possible 'background' process. Juggler will put those processes into a 'real' multi-tasking environment. He stressed that it's not meant for _entire_ programs to run in the background. "Macintosh programs are very user-dependant. The user has to give information, work with the application. It's not like Unix, where you can put an entire process into the background. It wouldn't make much sense having an application waiting for user-input in the background." Paul Molenaar (freelance journalist - now you know why I'm sensitive about these subjects ;)