Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!claris!wombat From: wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Disappointed in the IIgs (and Claris) Message-ID: <9076@claris.com> Date: 15 Mar 89 20:14:54 GMT References: <8903150458.AA00279@crash.cts.com> Organization: Claris Corporation, Mountain View CA Lines: 116 From article <8903150458.AA00279@crash.cts.com>, by tsouth@pro-pac.cts.com (System Administrator): > Apple has controlling interest in Claris, so essentially Claris is > a subsidiary of Apple. This is the way most conglomerates work. :) No argument there. Claris is a subsidiary of Apple. > Whether the name is Apple or Claris, the lack of support is still > there. The two are not equivalent. We at Claris do not think of ourselves as a part of Apple. > To date, the only Apple II programs I have seen Claris > author are conversions of programs which have already been written > for the ][ family, most notably, the networked versions of Appleworks > Classic. While, in a technical sense, Claris did produce the end > product, called Appleworks GS, it was not conceived or written at > Claris -- the major work on the program was conceived and written > at Styleware. To date, most Claris products are conversions and upgrades period. This includes Mac software. This was the direction Claris chose: to support the software they had inheirited; to let the customer base know that support was something Claris was interested in. I say it's a pretty close call as to how much of the work was done at StyleWare and how much at Claris. Yes, 98% of the design was done in Houston, but the amount of work we put in after coming out to Mountain View in Aug. is incredible. When you add to that the work put in by the testing team... well, that's why I say it's a close call. > Now, Claris bought Styleware on the hopes of gaining > another cash cow on a low budget, along with gaining some serious > programming support. Low budget? I am not privy to all the details of the sale, but I seriously doubt that it was what could be called "low budget." > Claris made a very wise decision, IMHO. The > question is, will the Claris company every start truly utilizing > this venture, and the previous resources which they have gained > from ][ family sales, to promote the ][ family software. Opinion > within the Claris working ranks appears to be a decisive no. (Not > only from net postings, but from numerous email and real-time > conversations I have had with Claris employees -- both pre- and post- > Styleware aquisition). I will admit that programmer interest in the GS at Claris is waning, but I think the principle reason is Apple's seemingly corresponding lack of interest. The battle over the II seems to be raging within Apple as well. There is a desire to support and expand and fix the OS and tools. The Mac is such a pleasure to program for by comparison. My opinion (which I have stated before) is that the GS is a nifty machine. But that's about as far as it goes. I continue to write "nifty" things for it, but writing something powerful... well that's what we tried for with AWGS, and it's something of a behemoth. From what I can tell, Claris intends to continue to support the II, but new products... I can't tell you yes or no, but I think it depends on what Apple does with the machine. > Since I, as a user and hobbyist, have only > this to base my opinion on, I definitely see a trend towards minimal > Apple II development at Claris, no matter what the future consequences. > Maybe some of the controlling officers at Claris have adopted the > stance which seems to permiate throughout a number of Apple officers; > Apple II sales are of no consequence, think big business only. I don't think that's it. II software sales _do_ matter. The Mac market is simply larger and must have priority. It's no secret that Claris intends to go public, but when is not known to anyone. To do that we/they must have a very solid base. Being supported by Apple allowed the over-extension of resources that buying StyleWare and Nashoba required. But to launch a major campaign of II software (more major than the AWGS/AWKS pair) simply wouldn't fit well into long-term plans at this point, as I see it. > The Apple II needs to be championed in both companies. If Apple comes out hard and heavy with the II, I don't think there'll be any problem with Claris following suit. But for Claris to do it alone, any more than the current state, I can't see it. > This is a market that is becoming so company specific that young > developers are to scared to even venture into the waters. Granted, > AWGS seriously sheds light on the limitations of the //gs. Granted, > there is not as much business distribution for the Apple ][ family. > Why can't Claris grant that it is they, in their personal relationship > with the Apple company, who should be promoting the best markets of > Apple ][ software? I think that the best markets of Apple II software are games. That's something Claris probably won't touch with a 10' pole. > >> To Apple, Claris is just another software company, albeit the one >> selling the biggest monster for the GS. > > That is pretty hard to swallow, mate... But again, everyone has their > own opinion on the matter. OK, it probably depends on who in Apple you mean. I mean on a day-to-day working basis. DTS with regard to developers, etc. Yes, if you mean someone at Apple who is on the board of trustees of Claris, Claris isn't just another software company. I apologise for the we/they mixing around references. Claris existed before I became an employee. When at StyleWare, we were we and they were they. Now at Claris, "we" can refer to StyleWare or Claris, etc. etc. etc. I still wear my StyleWare T-shirt :-) -- Scott Lindsey |"Cold and misty morning. I heard a warning borne in the air Claris Corp. | About an age of power when no one had an hour to spare" ames!claris!wombat| DISCLAIMER: These are not the opinions of Claris, Apple, wombat@claris.com | StyleWare, the author, or anyone else living or dead.