Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!claris!wombat
From: wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: RE: Re: Disappointed in the IIgs (was: GS/OS and programming standards)
Message-ID: <9041@claris.com>
Date: 8 Mar 89 23:58:17 GMT
References: <8903081123.aa11779@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>
Organization: Claris Corporation, Mountain View CA
Lines: 46

From article <8903081123.aa11779@SMOKE.BRL.MIL>, by RXBROWN@UALR.BITNET ("MR.FANTASTIC"):
>>Claris showed that it had major interest in the // by acquiring StyleWare and
>>marketing (Apple/GS)Works(GS)........
> 
> AppleWorks GS kind of sucks. I am not blaming the machine for that, I am blaming
>    the people who wrote it. I still prefer Apw 2.0. Apw GS takes too long to loa
>    d,
> to print a four to five page document take about 30 minutes. Thats because it
> prints in graphics mode. It would seem to me that if Claris was supporting
> the Apple // line they would release more than one product. You guys seem to
> have your heads stuck in the Mac. Not that I don't like the Mac, I just don't
> see much else than Apw comming out for the //s. It also overpriced for what you
> get, but I still like the program.
> 

And we who wrote it blame the machine/OS.  AppleWorks GS/Works was conceived
at StyleWare, not at Claris.  It was written according to Apple guidelines
for programs on the GS:  Human Interface standards which are basically the
same as those for the Mac.  You may complain that it's too Macish, but that's
the direction Apple wanted and wants to go with the machine.  That's what the
tools are geared for.  Yes, AWKS is faster at many things, but it doesn't have
to take "advantage" of the GS toolset.

AWGS and AWKS are two separate products for the //.  It is actually somewhat
unfortunate that AWGS was named after AWKS.  It is not an upgrade of AWKS.
The only things the two products share, aside from the name, are certain
concepts (word processing, spreadsheet, database, integration).

I've said it before: AWGS really stresses the limits of the IIgs in its
current incarnation.  Perhaps we were over-ambitious.  AWGS is the most
integrated product of its kind.

Before I get flamed further, I'm not claiming that AWGS is perfect (if it
had the perfect GS to run on).  By no means.  As a programmer, I recognise
the unavoidability of bugs, ESPECIALLY when writing in assembly.  But AWGS
is more solid than some people give it credit.  And yes we are going after
bugs in it when we find them or even suspect them.  Unfortunately, sometimes
it is very difficult to track down whether a bug lies in the program or in
the tools/OS that it assumes will work correctly.


-- 
Scott Lindsey         | UUCP: {ames,apple,portal,sun,voder}!claris!wombat
Product Development   | Internet:  wombat@claris.com  |  AppleLink: LINDSEY1
Claris Corp.          | These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple,
(415) 960-4070        | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or dead.