[X4U] Apple QC slipping?

[Aron S.Spencer]

So use old machines. They still work.

Seriously, there is a tradeoff between backwards compatibility and  
innovation. Maintaining backwards compatibility limits your ability to  
move forward. Attempts to work around this fundamental principle lead  
to convoluted messed up systems; i.e., Windows. Apple, as it happens  
has had better backwards compatibility than MS, while making bigger  
changes, but dropping OS 9 after 8 years is not unreasonable compared  
to MS dropping support for most XP and all earlier systems.

On Dec 18, 2008, at 10:16 AM, Ed Gould wrote:
>
> Randy:
>
> I guess we agree to disagree. Other manufactures take pride when  
> they have compatibility. That tells the customer that their  
> investment is sound and will be around for a LONG time.  It is one  
> thing to tell all your users hey go out and spend a lot of money to  
> replace functioning application for no real reason other than we  
> don't care about you. It is another reason say if some basic part of  
> the machine will no longer work because say technology changes. To  
> make this simple, 64 bit processors (for Apple) are not really  
> needed if they were then Apple long ago would have made systems with  
> larger memory compacity. They have stubbornly set a max memory limit  
> on most of their processors. *IF* they are doing this (and I am  
> suggesting they are) then 64 bit is NOT needed in any stretch of the  
> imagination. Any 64 bit offering would be wasting the consumers  
> money. If on the other hand the systems they (Apple) offered larger  
> memory insertion then it would be a reasonable thing to do (64 bit).  
> Its the same with any OS (not just Apple) the need must be there  
> *OR* the marketing hype people are doing an outstanding performance.  
> I can only compare Apple to one other manufacturer and they are  
> *SLOWLY* beginning to offer 64 bit OS's even then they are 99  
> percent compatible with their old systems. They aren't out banging  
> the drum to dump the old they are providing a migration path. How it  
> will end up is anyones guess at this time but rest assured if their  
> past is anything like the present they will honor and make it work  
> *RIGHT* for the majority of the old code. Companies are not going to  
> out and spend 100's of millions of dollars just to be on the current  
> "cutting edge" just to be there. The current Apple customer does not  
> have money to burn like some corporate companies.
>
> Backwards compatibility is *EVERYTHING* and a happy customer means  
> great quality control.
>
> Ed
>
> _______________________________________________
> X4U mailing list
> X4U at listserver.themacintoshguy.com
> http://listserver.themacintoshguy.com/mailman/listinfo/x4u
>
> Seven Cent Deals - Great legacy stuff Great Legacy Pricehttp://www.drbott.com/prod/db.lasso?cat=Seven+Cent+Deal

Aron S. Spencer
Union, NJ 07083