🚀 go-pugleaf

Previously I said:

]]   Think about how disappointed you will be if that new release of brand
]]   xyz word processor you like and use will require virtual memory? Will
]]   that happen? Probably not, in most cases. Hopefully software companies
]]   won't be stupid enough to ignore all the installed pluses and se's.
]]   The one certain thing is that you can't be sure anymore. The promise
]]   is no longer there for the older machines.

To which someone replied:

] I don't understand your reasoning.  Are you saying that Apple should
] keep -everyone- crippled, just to make sure nothing ever gets
] obsolete?  They shouldn't have put color in the Mac II, because of all
] those color paint programs that can't be used by people with Mac
] Plusses?  Apple shouldn't have released HyperCard because it can't run
] on a 512K Mac?

] When you take advantage of the power of new machines, you inevitably
] add features that can't be supported on older machines.  This is part
] of the price of progress.  Of course, you should make every effort to
] support backward compatibility, and Apple is doing that (much more so
] than many other computer companies).  But if you want inovation, you
] have to admit some degree of obsolesence.

Read what I said. I didn't say that Apple should or shouldn't do
anything. I was merely explaining why people are upset. They bought a
promise and the promise is no longer there.

It is true that Apple is maintaining backwards compatibility. It is
also true that both Apple and other manufacturers will likely be
concentrating their efforts on using the new capabilities rather than
expanding the power of the currently installed Pluses and SEs. There
is nothing illegal or even immoral about that. But people can no
longer count on new things coming out for the old machines. That is
what makes people unhappy.
----
Stephen Kurtzman        |    "You might be the largest Elizabeth, but
kurtzman@pollux.usc.edu |     Elizabeth is still a good name to have if
                        |     you're a girl." -- the Roches