Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:5490 comp.sys.mac:29777
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!ubvax!vsi1!apple!keith
From: keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Need some MF help
Keywords: MultiFinder
Message-ID: <28638@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 8 Apr 89 22:43:42 GMT
References: <1562@neoucom.UUCP> <28399@apple.Apple.COM> <3637@brunix.UUCP>
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 80

In article <3637@brunix.UUCP> omh@zaphod.UUCP (Owen M. Hartnett) writes:
>In article <28399@apple.Apple.COM> keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin) writes:
>
>>If you do have a valid reason for needing to know if MultiFinder is running,
>>please let me know! So far it's been a battle, with developers saying "We need
>>to know!" and Apple saying "No you don't!". Finding a legitimate reason for
>>knowing would put an end to this contest.
>>
>
>Why does there have to be a reason?  Why not just put up a flag in Sysenvirons?
>Apple DTS always seems to have the attitude that it knows best what 
>developers should know about (or rather, not know about).  

From one point of view, DTS *DOES* know best what developers should know
about. We know what is coming down in the future. We know what changes are
being made to the System Software. Based on this knowledge, we try our best to
prevent developers from burning themselves. We try to quide them down the road
of Future Compatibility. That's our job. So when we make position statements 
like this, it is with these reasons in mind. Believe me, it's NOT because our 
egos are too large to even consider that developers have brains of their own. 
If they were that large, I wouldn't be asking the question that I did.

> ... There may be
>developers out there with legitimate need to know - to fix bugs, to implement
>a novel feature, or for reasons yet unknown.

Could you expand on this? 

	- "To fix bugs": What bugs need to be fixed that require the knowledge 
		that MultiFinder is running?
	- "To implement a novel feature": What kind of features? I would like
		to know about them. So far, most features that developers want
		to implement revolve around questions like "Are there icons
		on the desktop?", or "How do I safely sublaunch?",  or "Am I
		able to unmount an MFS disk", NOT "Is MultiFinder active?"
	- "For reasons yet unknown": Until those reasons DO become known, there
		is no reason for checking for MultiFinder. I can't see a
		developer saying "Gee, let's check for MultiFinder. I don't
		know why, but it might come in handy in the future."

>If the information is available, and properly documented that there
>should be no reasons for using it (that we are currently aware of), then
>the programmer will know he has to take the responsibility for using it.
>
>True, some developers will misuse it, but then it's their problem.  Apple
>should endeavor to make as much information available as possible, and let
>us developers write some "insanely great" applications with it.

It's not just the developer's problem. It's Apple's problem and it's the
customer's problem. If a developer writes a program that misuses information,
the customer loses out when their program breaks when they upgrade to
the next version of System Software. And Apple loses out because we get blamed
for breaking that software. The customer doesn't know what is going on behind
the scenes; all they know is that their Macintosh doesn't work, and that Apple
makes Macintoshes. You should read our Customer mail!

We've already seen the misuse of MultiFinder information happen. When System
6.0 came out, WaitNextEvent was implemented all of the time. Many applications
subsequently failed to work properly. This was despite warnings about this in 
Technotes. 

As a major computer company, Apple has to be responsible about the kinds of
information it gives out. We cannot in good conscience give out information to
developers that they can use to hang themselves. This is Tech Support's
current stance. Do you disagree with it? Do you think that DTS should supply
the rope? If we did, do you think that the customers who constantly have to put
up with broken software could ever forgive us?

>
>Owen Hartnett
>Brown University Computer Science
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Rollin  ---  Apple Computer, Inc.  ---  Developer Technical Support
INTERNET: keith@apple.com
    UUCP: {decwrl, hoptoad, nsc, sun, amdahl}!apple!keith
"Argue for your Apple, and sure enough, it's yours" - Keith Rollin, Contusions