Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!agate!web-3f.berkeley.edu!labc-3dc From: labc-3dc@web-3f.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: ProDOS 8 [assemblers and] reference material Summary: sometimes... Message-ID: <22100@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: 27 Mar 89 07:56:39 GMT References: <8903252138.aa08342@SMOKE.BRL.MIL> <27873@apple.Apple.COM> <22073@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <27904@apple.Apple.COM> Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: University of California, Berkeley Lines: 30 In article <27904@apple.Apple.COM> mattd@Apple.COM (Matt Deatherage) writes: [snrak snrak] >Beneath Apple ProDOS is good. I have it myself; it is a useful reference. [...] >But it's NOT the official word. If you're just playing around, Beneath Apple >ProDOS will probably suit you quite well. But if you distribute your programs >to others, you owe it to THEM to base your programming on the word from Apple, >[...] Material in other books is *not* >guaranteed by Apple to remain unchanged. This is actually one of the reasons why I prefer 3rd party books... the Apple publications tell you only as much as you need to know. Books from other sources go much more in-depth, giving you a deeper understanding of what is going on. As you say, they make good tutorials. But as long as the line is drawn between what The Standard is and what might change, the "underground" publications are of greater value in my opinion. While certain //gs books may step over that line (there's a //gs tech ref on my desk which has a pile of now-invalid data about tool locations), I maintain that Beneath Apple ProDOS is a better book by far (out on a limb, but that's the stuff of lively discussions, right?) I would agree, however, that the Tech Notes are invaluable additions to the manuals. >Matt Deatherage, Apple Computer, Inc. | "The opinions expressed in this tome [5K .signature omitted] -- fadden@cory.berkeley.edu (Andy McFadden) ...!ucbvax!cory!fadden labc-3dc@widow.berkeley.edu