🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <90198.134333SAS102@psuvm.psu.edu> SAS102@psuvm.psu.edu (Steven A. Schrader) writes:
>In article <989@duteca.UUCP>, hansm@duteca8.tudelft.nl (Hans Mulder) says:
>>
>>Since I switched to system 6.0.4 MS Excel (v. 1.0) stopped working.
>>I called microsoft and was told that the solution to my problem was an
>>upgrade to version 2.2.
>
>>
>>My question now is:
>>        1. who is to blame that v. 1.0 doesn't work anymore
>>           - MicroSoft (according to me)
>>           - Apple
>>           - Me (according to the microsoft salesman)
>
>I would say Apple if anyone. Basically Microsoft did some things utilizing the
>way the System worked. When Apple upgraded, they had to implement changes in
>order to make room for the IIci and the portable. It was Apple's change in arch
>etechture that screwed things up.

And now, the opposing view:

Well, not *exactly* an opposing view, but Microsoft is notorious for
turning out darned good software by doing unorthodox things in their
programs.  So, although I cannot speak to this particular instance, it
would be entirely plausible if Microsoft's "utilizing the way the
System worked" actually consisted of Microsoft using things in a
quirky way contrary to Apple's recommended programming techniques.


	== Daniel ==

'At your age,' Allie wept, 'you ought to be ashamed.' -- 'Well, I'm
not,' the future Mrs. Boniek rejoined.  'A professor, and in Stanford,
California, so he brings the sunshine also.  I intend to spend many
hours working on my tan.'
                               from "The Satanic Verses", by Salman Rushdie