This mail answers serveral recent posts to save bandwidth.
> Yeah, I know there is NIE, but what is so great about it anyway?
The fact that is an essential part without which you wouldn't be
able to use most mail and browser apps under OS 2.x.
> and it's nearly impossible to configure right with all those
> IP addresses.
Well, there's always DHCP...
> Why isn't there a hack to allow modern mail systems like POP to
> work inside the NewtonMail software?
Hacking requires intimate knowledge of what you are planning to
hack. Unfortunately, Apple never disclosed this kind of information.
Things would be about ten million times easier if Apple disclosed the
source code of the Newton OSes.
> If all you great Newton software guys like Simon Bell could do it
> for OS 2.x, why not 1.x?
If I have two hundred thousand bricks and half a square
mile of premises, I can easily build a villa. If I have one hundred
bricks and one square yard, all I can possibly build is a doghouse.
Replace "premises" with "Newton RAM" and "bricks" with "documented
and bug-free features of the Newton OS", and there's your answer.
Believe me, I know what I'm talking about. I think NewtTest (available
in the software section of the site in the signature) is one of the
few pieces of Newton software that was developed for ALL Newton
operating
systems although 1.x had been a thing of the past for years back then.
Doing this was a pain because 90% of what OS 2.1 has on board I had to
code myself, always fighting against the little RAM these devices
have.
And you will notice that NewtTest provides much fewer tests when
running on 1.x devices. The reason is that there's simply no way to
access the hardware the way OS 2.x puts at one's disposal.
> Just because we 1.x users are a minority it doesn't mean we don't
exist.
As a matter of fact 2.x users are a minority these days, too ;-)
> Life as it is simple for 1.x users.
Err... you might want to try setting time and date. Just in case this
drives you as crazy as it always drives me, there's always
BetterSetter
available from the site in the signature. This app does, by the way,
also run on all Newton OSes, but it's really helpful if used with 1.x.
I agree that some things are better in 1.x, for example the fact that
it works with the Newton Connection Kit. But overall I'd still choose
OS 2.1 any day.
> I only have been a Newton user since September 2007, but I quickly
> found out that you 2.x users mostly keep everything for yourself.
You are very much mistaken. If there's one community on this planet
that
does NOT keep everything to itself, it's the Newton community. But we
are also humans and not magicians. It is of course not impossible to
hack software you do not have the source code for. Nothing is
impossible
software-wise if neither time nor manpower nor money is a limiting
factor.
Doing what you have in mind, though, requires a huge
amount of time and it does not offer any financial benefit likely to
pay
back even a tiny fraction of the spent time's worth. You will notice
that
the few people who still code for the Newton do this for fun and not
for
money. But all those guys and gals have a life, too...
> If somehow magically a solution appears to all of my Newton
problems,
> I will gladly forgive you.
Phew, that kind of relieves me. Thanks a lot...
> So, you're trying to tell me that today Newtons are just as useful
> in communication as is a man who cannot speak.
No, we are not. You wouldn't even notice that a man cannot speak if
the
only communication form you use is mail or fax.
Newtons are almost as useful as they were when Apple released
them. I, for one, find it extremely helpful to beam stuff between
Netwons,
for example, which is a form of communication, too. They are perfect
for entering
text that can easily be transferred to a PC or Mac via NCU or NCK.
It's just
that as far as mail or internet are concerned, 1.x Newtons (and in my
opinion
2.0 Newtons, too) are lacking the required hardware, software and
processor speed
to handle this in a way that is state of the art. And the ways that
are no
longer state of the art simply aren't supported anymore out there.
> And now, my life is ruined since I'll have to walk around Internet
Cafés
Hey, relax. There are more important things in life. A family, for
example. Or
having enough to eat every day. Or a tiny daughter that looks up at
you with
bright eyes and says "I love you, Daddy" because she means it and not
because
she wants something from you. Or being able to take a walk without
constantly
being afraid of some stupid sniper soldier shooting your head off
before you reach the next block :-)
> Goodbye the 10 dollars (plus shipping) that I paid for my Newton
Modem, since
> I can only use it now for faxing (which I don't do much anyway).
Strange. Faxing is the ONLY thing I'm using my modem for these days.
Quite often.
> Can't I just get a NewtonScript hacker and pay him $30 to hack the
NewtonMail
> software to accept mail from modern POP3 and such servers?
Hmmm...
To the best of my knowledge people selling cheeseburgers at McDonald's
earn about
8 bucks an hour these days. Assuming for a second that hacking
NewtonMail software
does not require a much better qualification worth a much better
payment, your
programmer would be better off selling cheeseburgers if this project
took
more than 4 hours from start to finish.
In this time you'd not even come close to getting an idea of what you
will be up to,
let alone get a single line of code written.
Would you accept loosing all your data due to a bug in a piece of
software
you just spent 30 bucks on?
Again, I know what I'm talking about
when I say that testing a piece of feature-complete software with all
Newton models and under all possible Newton OSes can take days, if not
weeks.
Even if you, like me, do own all models Apple ever came up with. Which
most
programmers out there don't.
If your software needs to patch Newton OS calls, which what you have
in mind
wuold definitely have to do, testing might well become impossible
because you
simply can't test its peaceful coexistence with all other software out
there
that's using the same system calls.
So, in a nutshell, I'm afraid $30 are not going to do the trick.
Neither are
$300 or $3000 if the programmer has to do this in the time required
for coding
software that pays the rent and feeds the family. Even if it WERE
possible
to overcome all hardware and software limitiations he'd constantly be
fighting
against, which it isn't.
Frank
-- Newton software and hardware at http://www.pda-soft.de
====================================================================
The NewtonTalk Mailing List - http://www.newtontalk.net/
The Official Newton FAQ - http://www.splorp.com/newton/faq/
The Newton Glossary - http://www.splorp.com/newton/glossary/
WikiWikiNewt - http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/
====================================================================
Received on Tue Jul 22 19:24:08 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 23 2008 - 18:30:00 EDT