The Logic Off Topic list

"Martin, Jeremy" <sadus@i...> wrote:
> [Redirected from LUG to L-OT:]
> 
> 
> From: "jamie+howarth" <jamie@j...> 
> Date: Thu Apr 4, 2002 8:27am 
> Subject: !!Thread getting too OT I think(OM)!!Re: [LAM] firewire 
drive  
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Salient Bits
> > > SDII files can be read on a PC by Awave Studio and 
> Quicktime also 
>  II data fork.
> > 
> > So, it cannot read the other part of the SDII file - which is the 
> > Resource Fork (which has channel and bit depth info etc.) - the 
> reason 
> ... PC's don't have an equivalent - 
> > btw, this is one reason why in the past mac files didn't need 
> extensions 
> > like .exe as the necessary info was in the resource fork. With 
> Mac OS X, 
> > extensions are being used much more however than the 
> resource fork 
> > stuff - though it is still in use.
> 
> This is one of the substantive differences ( as contrasted to the 
> religious wars) that differentiates the two platforms. Apple saw 
> this coming years and years ago, and imbedded an identifying 
> creator code and filetype within the file's header, which makes 
> files self-identifying to their host apps, and obviates the need 
for 
> the clumsy .jpg or.qtv or.doc or .whatevah extensions. It is also a 
> really really good idea, and part of why Mac users get so crazy 
> over the platform wars is that most of the really really good ideas 
> that the Mac OS clearly provided are undermined by the 
> economic necessity to adopt  less sophisticated (dumber) 
> conventions still required  by the Windows OS's stubborn 
> reliance on vestiges of the antiquated MSDOS. It is truly 
> paradoxical that a culture that kids itself that it is progressive 
still 
> allows the droppings of this dinosaur to litter the landscape, 20 
> years after it was rendered technologically obsolete by the 
> alternative methods of building apps the MacOs provided.

Can I tell u a story? I develop information systems for companies. A 
couple of months ago I was introduced to a transportation company. We 
had to install an SQL Server system for them since they changed their 
mind of doing things in Access; things were becoming too slow for 
them due to performance of that databases system. I couldn't believe 
my eyes when I saw people around still working in these ugly dos 
windows that used to be used in the late 80's, early 90's. Those 
Turbo Pascal OWL windows.
Anyway, this is going to be a big client to coming years, :). And we 
are talking a middle large company here, probably over a bilion euro 
turnover a year. And they still are working with a couple of these 
DOS programs. They tell you: "As long as it's working, why bother". 
The only way to get them to invest is when they can enhance their 
output, due to automation changes.
These are exactly the companies M$ makes the most money on. You won't 
see any Apple machines around these kind of companies. Apple is more 
something for designers, audio people and video people.

I agree with you that there are a lot of fine technology into Apple 
stuff( more or less nicked somewhere else, but hey, who doesn't do 
that, :)). But it's not cool stuff that sells. It's the way you can 
sell it that counts. And if it can integrate with the stuff you 
already have. Companies can't buy a complete bunch of new stuff 
without getting time to get used to the new stuff. So, things have to 
go in phases. And during these phases the company still has to keep 
doing it's activities. This is exactly where M$ will keep it's 
customers happy, and maybe gain a couple along the way.

We audio people are the ones that probably demand the most from our 
systems. Majority of systems are used for simply doing some writing, 
some emailing and some gaming. You could do that on one of the 
earliest Pentium processors too.

My point: it's business that keeps old technology alive. As long as 
these old dos files can run on a newer OS by M$, people will keep 
buying M$. Until M$ does not support this old technology. And I can 
keep making money on the problems they need to have solved with these 
newer OSes, like rewriting of programs and introduction of newer 
information systems, : ).
Yoonchi.