[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
ANNOUNCE: MacHack_96.{msw,ps,rtf} available + news
Hi Folks,
MacHack was fun, interesting and hopefully a good start at getting
Executor 2 known better in the greater Mac community and at Apple
Computer, Inc. in specific.
As I promised before I went, an electronic copy of the paper I
presented (it was cowritten by Mat Hostetter) is available from our
ftp site. It should soon be available via our web site, too.
It's available in three formats, Microsoft Word, RTF and PostScript.
ftp://ftp.ardi.com/pub/MacHack_96 is the directory that contains these
files:
MacHack_96.msw
%MacHack_96.msw
MacHack_96.rtf
%MacHack_96.rtf
MacHack_96.ps
You shouldn't need to pick up any of the "%" files, but if you plan on
opening the Word or RTF versions in Executor, then by picking up the
appropriate "%" file you won't have to worry about setting the file's
type and creator.
The technical reaction to Executor was universal acknowledgement that
Executor is impressive. The political reaction was mixed. Most
people I talked to think Executor, properly marketed, should not hurt
Apple's hardware sales. There was one exception in the people I
talked to, and I don't think he and I would have had a conversation
had he recognized who I was. As it is, when we found out he said,
with an obvious trace of resentment that he thought we had a good
product, but that it would *not* help Apple's hardware sales. It's
quite possible that many other people who didn't talk with me thought
the same.
Why would I think Executor would help Apple hardware sales? Because
Mac Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) are in a difficult place when
they're forced by their clients to provide solutions that work on PCs.
Some go cross-platform, some just drop Mac altogether and code for
Windows. In both cases their code is no longer Mac API based and a
Windows version of their software is then released. Many ISVs *have*
to make their product available on PCs. Given this state, using
Executor to fill such requests allows the ISVs to continue developing
"Mac only" products which naturally will run best on real Macs.
Programs written to Win32 can run on x86, MIPS, Alpha *AND* PPC, all
architectures with fast implementations available. Programs written
to Mac API can run on 68k (slow) and PPC. This disparity is well
known in Apple, although like many other things, there's a tendency to
believe that a new version of the OS will solve the problem. Since
Copland/PPC won't be available for another year and there will be a
lot of tricky driver issues associated with a Copland/x86 port (if one
is ever done), I think that if Apple hesitates on this one, that
they'll be regretting it later. Yes, I'm biased, but I honestly
believe this.
"Scriptability: A Bare-Bones Introduction" won the paper contest, but
the Executor Internals paper (and two others) won an honorable
mention. I was given an hour to present our paper, but since there
was nobody else using the room afterwards my technical presentation
lasted for two hours, then, after all but three others had left I
discussed my perception of where Apple in specific and the computer
industry in general was heading, then we lost another person and the
remaining three people (two others and myself) chatted about a variety
of topics for another two hours. Yikes. I hope my mother paid them
well to put up with me for five hours straight (to be honest I spent
more time listening than talking during the last two hours).
Today I spent a little time exchanging email with a contact I made at
Apple. He is looking forward to having me come out and present
Executor and the issues that it raises. I was trying to arrange an
appointment for this Friday or this Monday but that's looking like
something Apple can't do. I'm at the mercy of their schedule, but in
the meantime I'll be placing our first ads in a couple of the big
computer magazines. Our first ads will be "business card" ads, but
they should help get the word out.
The next few weeks are going to be rough on us. We only have about 60
beta1 CD-ROMs left and it will still be a little while before we can
burn the Executor 2 master CD-ROM (part of the delay is that our
CD-ROM burner wigged out as I was preparing a CD-ROM of our software
testing library for MacHack) and then a little while beyond that for
us to get our packages back, but there's clearly an end (to our days
of not having a shrink-wrapped product) in sight.
--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com