Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:5566 comp.sys.mac:29959
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!rutgers!apple!apple.com!shebanow
From: shebanow@apple.com (Andrew Shebanow)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: DTS and Compatibility (Was: MF)
Message-ID: <1304@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 12 Apr 89 01:37:12 GMT
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 40
References:<1562@neoucom.UUCP> <28399@apple.Apple.COM> <3637@brunix.UUCP>

In article <3637@brunix.UUCP> omh@brunix (Owen M. Hartnett) writes:
> Apple DTS always seems to have the attitude that it knows best what 
> developers should know about (or rather, not know about).  There may be
> developers out there with legitimate need to know - to fix bugs, to 
implement
> a novel feature, or for reasons yet unknown.
> 
> 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.

Unfortunately, it isn't just the developer's problem. If a developer 
writes and sells a buggy application, and that application breaks when a 
future version of the system software gets released, it hurts all of the 
programs users, who are Apple customers, and it hurts Apple as well, since 
many of those customers will blame Apple and not the developer (I am 
speaking from past experience here).

DTS is in a position to influence this problem, by informing developers of 
the consequences when they want to do something dangerous, and by 
withholding information when that information would be abused if it was 
publicly documented. This policy is not written in stone: this whole 
discussion was brought about by a survey question from a DTS engineer. If 
someone can convince us that there are COMPELLING reasons to publish this 
information, we will do so, either privately or publicly. So far though, I 
haven't seen any reasons posted that justify the compatibility dangers.

If this constitutes "arrogance" on our part, then I apologize for all of 
us. However, we feel that it is our duty (wow, pretty heavy there dude) to 
try and keep developers on the straight and narrow path to compatibility.

Andrew Shebanow
DTS Compatibility Ninja

- All Opinions Are Mine, and Mine Alone -