Future direction of A/UX?

[Michael McClary]

In article <fOlrc#1p0oJt=michael at xanadu.COM> michael at xanadu.UUCP (Michael McClary) writes:
>
>Seems to me this approach would work.
> [suggestion for Apple ad, including...]
>	
>	The vendors of the following products claim A/UX v1.1 compatibility.
>	Apple does not warrant their claims.
>
>	 - Blah-windows v1.2 and later.
>	 - Blort-paint v2.3 and later.
>	 - Etc.
>
>	(Apple does not support third-party software.  Users should contact
>	 the third-party vendor for support.  Apple will accept user reports
>	 of gross malfunction of third-party software on this list, especially
>	 malfunction causing damage to system or user files other than those
>	 associated with the third-party product in question.  Apple does not
>	 warrant third-party software on this list to be free of such bugs,
>	 and does not promise to investigate all such reports.)
>
>	(Third parties are invited to contact Apple for procedures for
>	 inclusion on this list.)
>
>Then:
> - Include their product if they send you a copy that launches successfully.
>   (Make it clear that Apple gets one usage license as part of the deal.)
> - Pull it if users complain it eats their disk and you can replicate the
>   problem, or if you can't test the claim because of product problems (such
>   as copy protection).
> - Don't bother with further testing.
> - Don't bother with applications that look hard to test.
> - Don't bother with applications that don't look big sellers, unless they
>   might appear to compete with an Apple product.

On second thought, if you cut it down to:

	(Apple does not support third-party software, nor does it
	 warrant third-party software on this list to be free of
	 malfunctions which might cause damage to system or user
	 files.  Users of third-party software should contact the
	 vendor for support.)
	
you wouldn't need to test it at all, and you could STILL make them send you
a copy in case you wanted to test it later.