Re: In the Shallow End

"ZnU" <znu@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:znu-D74E57.16424413082006@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <12dus0n3shhhc87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Dan Johnson" <danieljohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Still, I do not find the "they meant to have a disappointing Leopard
preview" arguments convincing, because I see no reason why they
should desire this. The one they gave is utterly implausible to me.

Apple only has so much flexibility with when WWDC occurs (or else
people would *really* start thinking something was wrong). So, the
question becomes, is it reasonable to plan one's entire OS development
schedule around what will make for an impressive 90 minute presentation
on an afternoon in August?

Well. Speaking as a professional developer, I would just
ask:

Is there some *other* way to organize development schedules?

:D

I don't think so, and Apple has in recent years gotten more mature
about this sort of thing.

What do you mean?

Plus, people keep saying, well, they could have gotten the full feature
set working in demo mode, at least, even if things weren't really done.

Of course.

But Apple really isn't big on fake feature demos. And fake demos would
be particularly pointless at a developer conference where the keynote
is just a prelude to hands-on sessions (which are rather difficult with
fake features) and to actually handing out developer releases of the
product.

Nobody is proposing "fake" demos; "not finished" is not the same
thing as "fake".

Think what the spin would have been if Apple had demoed all sorts of
neat stuff and then handed out copies of Leopard that didn't include
half of it! Everyone would be talking about how desperate they must be
and how they were obviously really scared of Vista.

Well I don't know about Everyone. But I would have
said that, fer sure. :D

[snip]
Not ambitious enough to have the cool features ready to demo
at WWDC 06!

Or maybe they're *so* ambitious they're working on features they
couldn't possibly have finished in time!

Oh, I take it for granted they are doing that. The features
already shown are surely not "finished" in time for
the demo.

I have no idea, really, and neither do you. But I don't see any
particular reason to disbelieve Apple's claim that the Leopard feature
set is larger than has thus far been disclosed.

Well, it depends on how much faith you have the
The Steve's pronouncements. What we have here to
bolster your believe in this is, as near as I can tell,
his say-so.

[snip]


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: VFP 9 on Windows 98 SE
    ... and the only reason that you would'nt recoup your ... My point is that if you are not using the productivity features of VFP, ...
    (microsoft.public.fox.programmer.exchange)
  • Re: A Mystery Resolved
    ... The idea that Apple would push major ... let us assume that the Top Secret Features exist and have ... the present developer releases are not feature-complete. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: VS2005 Not ready for prime time
    ... Css features are extremely lacking. ... It demanded more knowledge of the developer, ... Microsoft hit the ball right out of the park. ... (like all the code-behind and project model "improvements" in ASP.NET ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: How can I upgrade Office 2002 SP 3 to Office 2007 and keep both versions?
    ... features is confusing and takes up space that I'd rather use as my ... well -- and my issue is that the arrangement of the features gives me grief ... and your existing Office Suite is better than the ... I hate to rag on Office '07, but I've found no good reason to migrate to ...
    (microsoft.public.office.setup)
  • Re: C# or VB.NET?
    ... i am a part-time/casual developer. ... VBScript, and now when I'm migrating to .NET, I obviously chose VB.NET. ... The reason, of course, is the .NET Framework... ... The reason that both languages are identical is because they both target the .NET Framework. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)