NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/sys/mac/oop/macapp3/309

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-29 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!olivea!apple!applelink.apple.com
From: [e-mail] (UT Austin, Ken Duncan,PRT)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.oop.macapp3
Subject: Re3: Takeover
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 29 Dec 92 02:05:00 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: AppleLink Gateway
Lines: 29

MacAppers and Apple Decison Makers,

To follow up on Jeff Alger's comments concerning Apple overhauling the pricing
structure and continuing with MacApp/Bedrock:

Apple:
Yes, we asked for cross platform development, faster compiler times, better
tools, etc. BUT we did not ask for SYMANTEC to provide it. I would like to see
Apple support Bedrock/MacApp by taking the lead in product development,
ownership, support, and transition from MacApp to Bedrock. I would like see
MacApp 3.0x releases and bug fixes (on ET0) until Bedrock ships. You have a
large investment in MacApp and so do we. We are very willing to let it evolve,
but Apple might be the right one to make it happen. I do not feel comfortable
waiting for Symantec to release Bedrock. The last time THINK worked with MacApp
was version 2.0x wasn't it?

MADA, or any other type group, can't support MacApp IMHO. Apple makes a lot of
statements about the importance of developers and here's a chance to prove it.
Give us the tools to "break on through to the other side" with you. Many of us
subscribe to ETO to have one-stop-shopping for our tools. Don't change this.

As many times as Apple has spun-off and returned Claris, there should be some
precedent set for recognizing a mistake and correcting it. End this platform
confusion and provide developers a path for the future.

Thanks,

Ken Duncan