home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pageworks.com!world!eff!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!acfcluster.nyu.edu!drennan
- From: drennan@acfcluster.nyu.edu (XIXAX)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
- Subject: Re: SuperCard 1.6 needs much improvements
- Message-ID: <1992Aug29.185257.1@acfcluster.nyu.edu>
- Date: 29 Aug 92 23:52:57 GMT
- References: <1992Aug28.204830.8633@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Sender: notes@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Notes Person)
- Organization: New York University
- Lines: 26
- Nntp-Posting-Host: acf1.nyu.edu
-
- In article <1992Aug28.204830.8633@midway.uchicago.edu>, ttak@ellis.uchicago.edu (toki takeuchi) writes:
- > I got SuperCard 1.6 expecting to see a HyperCard 2.1
- > compatible product, but I was GREATLY disappointed by
- > the apparent lack of effort put into it. SuperCard 1.5
- > had too many holes, and SuperCard 1.6 failed to patch them.
- >
- > Is SueprCard 1.7 on the way? I hope I will find it
- > a little more acceptable this time.
- >
- > Kenji T.
- >
-
- You HAVE to be kidding.
-
- First off, SuperCard 1.6 was in answer to the 2.0 upgrade; not the 2.1 upgrade.
- If you are expecting Hypercard 2.1, then USE Hypercard 2.1. SuperCard has gone
- off in a different direction, true. But a more robust development platform of
- the hypertalk variety does not exist. What holes are you speaking of?
- Admittedly, the learning curve of SuperCard is different than HyperCard--you
- have both an editing and runtime environment to adjust too. But beyond that,
- the pluses of SC far outweigh any drawbacks, IMHO.
- --
- _______________________________________________________________________________
- |Dany Drennan <+> Interactive Telecommunications Program, NYU | Technology |
- |drennan@acfcluster.nyu.edu|xixax@aol.com|xixax@echo.panix.com| is Autonomy |
- _______________________________________________________________________________
-