Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.comm
Subject: Re: Newsreaders
Date: 30 Mar 2015 15:38:05 GMT
Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <cnt8usFbj9lU6@mid.individual.net>
References: <l4jfnl$995$1@dont-email.me> <cnks0aF70euU1@mid.individual.net> <slrnmhc181.nmd.tmo1138@davidjr-macpro.local> <billvan-E45A84.21034127032015@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net> <slrnmhchjq.195g.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> <billvan-D7D671.10325128032015@shawnews.vc.shawcable.net> <0001HW.1AC73E2600A715E11090593CF@news.eternal-september.org> <cnonh3F76eeU1@mid.individual.net> <cnpt9pFfkq6U1@mid.individual.net> <slrnmhgavb.1i53.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> <slrnmhgl1n.j6r.hshubs@foxtrot.local> <slrnmhhklu.erj.timmcn@sugaree-2.local> <mfbpep$p7$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net THSzAmkUQ6cfXDN3dZe7IQeAEhrByF9ou2RB81yUoj0RqSUwPE
Cancel-Lock: sha1:CUuLAGjNOYFBbOgPs9QvPd/IUQY=
X-Face: _.g>n!a$f3/H3jA]>9pN55*5<`}Tud57>1<n@LQ!aZ7vLO_nWbK~@T'XIS0,oAJcU.qLM dk/j8Udo?O"o9B9Jyx+ez2:B<nx(k3EdHnTvB]'eoVaR495,Rv~/vPa[e^JI+^h5Zk*i`Q;ezqDW< ZFs6kmAJWZjOH\8[$$7jm,Ogw3C_%QM'|H6nygNGhhl+@}n30Nz(^vWo@h>Y%b|b-Y~()~\t,LZ3e up1/bO{=-)
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin)
Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.comm:2657

On 2015-03-30, Doc O'Leary <droleary@2usenet2014.subsume.com> wrote:
> For your reference, records indicate that 
> Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
>> How long do you expect them to maintain "backwards 
>> compatibility?"
>
> I propose a compromise solution: break out the actual cost of supporting
> old software.  Whether it’s an old network stack or PPC binaries, it would
> be at the very least amusing to see a price tag put on them as add-on
> products.  I really would like to see the market play out the long tail
> more often than it does.  If Apple is willing to sell a watch for $17K,
> why not at least *try* to sell Rosetta for $99 or $399 or whatever.

If they were stand-alone modules that didn't require significant changes
to other parts of the operating system that might fly. That is *not* the
case, though.

> That’s one of the reasons Usenet itself has stagnated; it can no longer
> take advantage of the economies of scale.  And I suspect that’s the same
> minuscule market that exists for Open Transport itself.  MT-NW is the
> only thing I recall losing when it went away.

That's because other application developers modified their apps to use
newer frameworks than Open Transport. You do realize that most Mac
networking apps used Open Transport, historically, right? 

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR