[Hx] Helix RADE 7.0

[William R. Bayne]

Well folks, I bit the bullet and bought the latest and greatest from QSA on the 31st.  In registering my RADE I entered a password, but have not set one for any individual relation/collection.  I read QSA's 7.0 info. dutifully, and so plunged in.

I'm most grateful that 7.0 is still compatible with my system 10.6.8.  Updating copies of my collections from 5.3 to 6.1 was seamless.  Earlier, doesn't work.  Seems I'll have to go back and update earlier collections to 5.3 separately or send them to QSA.  

My very simple Xmas list relation keeps track of name, street, town, state, zip and an entry to document "card sent" and "card received".  Each year I go back and update the year shown in the heading, any address changes and add people as necessary.  Opened that relation in 7.0 and tried to update the year on the List form.  No joy.  Some basic things are no longer in the least intuitive.

Double clicking on my "ListFrm" icon opens the form all right, but I can't change the text in the title window.  Aha!  The "chooser" panel previously to the left of the Relation window is missing, as is the trash can below.  OK, I located an "Element Panel" under "Icon" tab, and it shows entirely different and SEPARATE windows for the Relation window, the Collection window and a given form.   

So now I'm juggling FOUR windows to work with information previously present in one interactive one.  Sigh.

The Element Panel buttons are TINY and completely unidentified.  I guess I can go back on my old machine and print out a "cheat sheet" as to what each of the top six do.  One looks like it might have a "T" in it.  I select  it and try to change the text in my form title window.  Success!  

As a test, I drag a new template form over.  Success!  Now, how do I get rid of it?  Clicking the option at the top right of the Relation window just gives me a "Find Icon" option.  No option to "Undo".  Dragging it to the "Trash" in my Dock does nothing.  No "trash" option under tabs, or "Delete".  I've updated a relation and changed one digit (the year) in the title in over two hours.

At present I'm dismayed at the learning curve before me to just be able to do VERY simple things at which I have heretofore been proficient.  I'm sure there are some really good reasons for all these changes, at least I hope so.  I'm from the school of "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!  

I refuse to believe I'm as stupid as I feel at this point in the "upgrade" process.  I don't recall a "Read me" in the installation process...just drag 'n drop.  Upgrading directly from 6.1 to 7.0, I may need to read the 6.2 notes.

WRB

[Publiclee]

On 3 Jan 2017, at 11:05, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

As a test, I drag a new template form over.  Success!  Now, how do I get rid of it?  Clicking the option at the top right of the Relation window just gives me a "Find Icon" option.  No option to "Undo".  Dragging it to the "Trash" in my Dock does nothing.  No "trash" option under tabs, or "Delete".  I've updated a relation and changed one digit (the year) in the title in over two hours.

At present I'm dismayed at the learning curve before me to just be able to do VERY simple things at which I have heretofore been proficient.  I'm sure there are some really good reasons for all these changes, at least I hope so.  I'm from the school of "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!  

I refuse to believe I'm as stupid as I feel at this point in the "upgrade" process.  I don't recall a "Read me" in the installation process...just drag 'n drop.  Upgrading directly from 6.1 to 7.0, I may need to read the 6.2 notes.

Cmd-Delete trashes selected icons.

I bet you’re glad you’re not updating from Double Helix! So much more to forget.

Seriously this is what happens to all of us who don’t keep up. Change is generally incremental until major leaps in technology.

Apple has massively changed the underlying technology of macOS as well as its name. QSA can barely keep up to that let alone the fact that it is not writing to Apple’s core technologies but rather to an open source, cross-platform third party framework that itself can’t keep up with Apple and Windows and whatever. And it introduces its own bugs and idiosyncracies.

You should read the technotes associated with this release. There are strong technical reasons for every change away from your beloved classical Helix. Not all are wanted, even by those who made them.

Adapt and survive. That’s why we still have Helix.

Lee

[Steven F Finder]

At first it’s weird. Then you begin to get the hang of it. And it will start to make sense.

There will be things that will always seem wrong or at least better the old way. There will be things that seem so much better the new way.

In the end, you’ll get use to it. The odds are that you will prefer the newer approach once you feel more comfortable with it.

At least, that’s been my experience. 

You know that it’s not just Helix that changes things, it’s the same for everything.

For the last 10 years, I’ve owned a BMW 6 series with adaptive cruise control. It had the most intuitive, fast, and easy to use cruise control system I’ve ever used. Hands down better than anything. It was all based on a left sided stalk below the light control stalk. So much better than pushing little buttons on the steering wheel. So what did BMW do after making the best cruise control control system? They moved the cruise control system to little buttons on the steering wheel.

It’s not just software that has this problem.

Steven Finder

On Jan 2, 2017, at 6:05 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Well folks, I bit the bullet and bought the latest and greatest from QSA on the 31st.  In registering my RADE I entered a password, but have not set one for any individual relation/collection.  I read QSA's 7.0 info. dutifully, and so plunged in.

I'm most grateful that 7.0 is still compatible with my system 10.6.8.  Updating copies of my collections from 5.3 to 6.1 was seamless.  Earlier, doesn't work.  Seems I'll have to go back and update earlier collections to 5.3 separately or send them to QSA.  

My very simple Xmas list relation keeps track of name, street, town, state, zip and an entry to document "card sent" and "card received".  Each year I go back and update the year shown in the heading, any address changes and add people as necessary.  Opened that relation in 7.0 and tried to update the year on the List form.  No joy.  Some basic things are no longer in the least intuitive.

Double clicking on my "ListFrm" icon opens the form all right, but I can't change the text in the title window.  Aha!  The "chooser" panel previously to the left of the Relation window is missing, as is the trash can below.  OK, I located an "Element Panel" under "Icon" tab, and it shows entirely different and SEPARATE windows for the Relation window, the Collection window and a given form.   

So now I'm juggling FOUR windows to work with information previously present in one interactive one.  Sigh.

The Element Panel buttons are TINY and completely unidentified.  I guess I can go back on my old machine and print out a "cheat sheet" as to what each of the top six do.  One looks like it might have a "T" in it.  I select  it and try to change the text in my form title window.  Success!  

As a test, I drag a new template form over.  Success!  Now, how do I get rid of it?  Clicking the option at the top right of the Relation window just gives me a "Find Icon" option.  No option to "Undo".  Dragging it to the "Trash" in my Dock does nothing.  No "trash" option under tabs, or "Delete".  I've updated a relation and changed one digit (the year) in the title in over two hours.

At present I'm dismayed at the learning curve before me to just be able to do VERY simple things at which I have heretofore been proficient.  I'm sure there are some really good reasons for all these changes, at least I hope so.  I'm from the school of "If it ain't broke, DON'T FIX IT!  

I refuse to believe I'm as stupid as I feel at this point in the "upgrade" process.  I don't recall a "Read me" in the installation process...just drag 'n drop.  Upgrading directly from 6.1 to 7.0, I may need to read the 6.2 notes.

WRB

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Lee,

Comments interspersed in "< >" and bold.

WRB

On Jan 2, 2017, at 7:27 PM, Publiclee wrote:

On 3 Jan 2017, at 11:05, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

<snip>

I refuse to believe I'm as stupid as I feel at this point in the "upgrade" process.  I don't recall a "Read me" in the installation process...just drag 'n drop.  Upgrading directly from 6.1 to 7.0, I may need to read the 6.2 notes.

Cmd-Delete trashes selected icons.

<Thanks.  

Where is that written?  Insofar as I can tell, it isn't in the RADE 7.0 technote "Revisions to the Delete dialog in Helix 7.0.  

I went to the "Welcome to Helix 6.2" page and read:  "Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive Helix RADE 6.2 User’s Manual, or even a single “what has changed since Helix 6.1” document available. Helix RADE 6.2 was a ‘journey’ and changes were documented along the way.  Oh, great.  I just paid $369 for an application upgrade utterly lacking the most basic instructions for purchasers.  

Guess I'll cross my fingers and hope that Jan Harrington steps forward with the "Missing Manual for Helix 7.0".  She has demonstrated great talent in making Helix understandable to most who could productively use it.>

I bet you’re glad you’re not updating from Double Helix! So much more to forget.

Seriously this is what happens to all of us who don’t keep up.

<Hey!  I kept up through Helix Express and every release up to 6.2 which had no useable Design Mode (all I use).

Change is generally incremental until major leaps in technology.

<I presume you refer to the wonders of OSX being in response to Apple's adoption of the Intel chip.  I'd REALLY hate to think it was because Apple thought it might save money by keeping vendors in the dark as to long term intentions.

Apple has massively changed the underlying technology of macOS as well as its name.

<I think "aggressively" would be the more accurate term.  

MacWrite came with my 512kE.  Went to MacWrite II, then to WriteNow.  In my opinion any improvement in the computing experience from the "look and feel" of OSX was completely overshadowed by unapologetic change for the sake of change that was intentionally "IN YOUR FACE"!  To me the OSX "rollout" reflected the dark side of Steve Job's inner self.

I sniffed around the edges of 10.2 on a G3 MacBook normally booted in OS9 until OSX 10.3 came out.  That release they got right.  Even so, Apple had to ending the ability of Macs to boot in OS9 before wide adoption of OS X took place. 

Even with 10.3, I still couldn't natively run Helix, WritenNow or my OS9 Mail program (Outlook Express?)  Tried to use Word for almost a year.  Ultimately decided NO WAY.  Pages was "the answer", but I had to pay Apple for it (and invest more time to become proficient and to translate my archives).  Apple's "Mail" came with my Mini and has worked fine to date.  My Mail archives have grown such that someday I must convert emails I archive on technical subjects to MailSteward.

My June '05 Mac Mini couldn't boot in OS9 So, yes, I "moved forward" kicking and screaming eventually to 10.4 investing such time and money as it took.  While I purchased an Intel mini on Black Friday of '06, it was some 4 years later before I had migrated my primary computer use to it.  My recent purchase of Helix 7.0 was intended to complete that migration.>

QSA can barely keep up to that let alone the fact that it is not writing to Apple’s core technologies but rather to an open source, cross-platform third party framework that itself can’t keep up with Apple and Windows and whatever. And it introduces its own bugs and idiosyncracies.

<I can't argue your point here, and, with the Mac OS now dependent on Apple IOS people it is inevitable the low attention span people, the monkeys, now occupy the executive offices of the Circus.  They win.  I'l probably get an iPhone next year so I, too, can hold up the line at Walmart getting them to match the "best price" available locally for everything on my shopping list; but a Mini will remain my "hub" for the foreseeable future.>

You should read the technotes associated with this release.

<So far I have only read technotes as seem to apply to what I am doing.  I went through the Helix 7.0 Release notes in detail.  I just skimmed all the 6.2 technotes.  Most refer to functions and sophistications foreign to my use.

There are strong technical reasons for every change away from your beloved classical Helix. Not all are wanted, even by those who made them.

<I'd like to see some of those "strong technical reasons".  Like why the trash can was trashed?  Helix has many "parallel paths", and THAT one was fundamental.

Adapt and survive. That’s why we still have Helix.

<Actually, we still have Helix IN SPITE OF APPLE is because Matt and Gil fell in love with it and made a financially and intellectually indefensible series of decisions to persevere no matter what to save this truly unique application.  They have blazed a trail where even the prior path was indistinct or missing, and I'm both impressed and thankful for such dedication.

When someone previously really good looking and smart must be reconstructed after a severe wreck, every beholder will have their own opinion as to whether, with 20-20 hindsight, such effort and expense expended were actually justified.  Yes, I loved Helix as it was.  For better or worse, we have what we have, and I do try to have an open mind.

I remain, however, a computer user that is not PAID to "stay current".  I only do what i HAVE to to "stay functional".  Our differing perspectives are each individually valid.>

Lee

[Publiclee]

If you can remember which version of Helix removed the trash can then that’s where the accompanying tech note resides.

In general you need rediscover “discovery” - its easy to forget it when you know the interface well enough to do your job..

Discovery is required where the interface hides less important functions. You need to trawl the menus bearing in mind that they contain actions that apply to specific objects in specific contexts. The most used actions will have keyboard shortcuts attached to them.

in this case select the unwanted icon, go to the “Icon” menu, look for the “Delete Icon" menuitem and “discover “ the accompanying command.

This technique has applied since the first Mac. It should be part of your muscle memory by now.

 Then again, as my wife demonstrated today - not everyone thinks that way. She’s dying for a MacOS that responds to incoherent verbal abuse with the proper action on the telepathically identified object

—

Lee Rydstrand
l...@quipu.com.au

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Lee,

Thanks for trying to help.  I did as you suggested, and it works fine.  Obviously one of many alternate ways in Helix to do the same thing that has always been there.  But that wasn't the way I got rid of unwanted icons in the Helix Design mode.  I  dragged them into the trash.  

If I have to learn a significant number of different ways to accomplish something previously intuitive, the current lack of a summary of changes combined with the current lack of basic instructions can render Helix useless to me indefinitely.  That isn't something purchasers of upgrades should ever face.

My difficulty in changing the year was twofold.  FIrst, I had to "Select Template Tool" from the Icon tab which opens another selection window from which I needed to select "Data Rectangle".  I still couldn't change the year from 2016 to 2017 because my List Form window was not wide enough to contain the complete form header.  Once I did all these things, I'm good; but NONE were explained anywhere as changes to how "business was previously done".

Now I would like to pull up each entry in sort order to revise as desired.  Before, I would go to "View" and select the query template wanted and the sort order.  No way to do that.  The "search" option on the Query is useless to my intended purpose.  I arbitrarily opened my "Entry" and looked under "View.  NOW, lo and behold, I can "find first", "find next", "find last" and "find previous", just as I used to do with the Form Query (which I know has been removed).  So far I feel more like a beta tester than a consumer.

The trash can is there in my Helix 6.1.  I find no mention of it being removed in QSA's 6.2 or 7.0 notes.  I still wonder "why"?  Is there a note, some "reason" for it's demise?.  I'm SURE there's a reason for such a change, and I'd like to understand it.  Similarly, I don't find any mention as to WHY Element Panels were separated from their related Collection windows.  

Best!

WRB

-- 

[Publiclee]

Hmm, didn’t think i was going to deal with much more than cmd-delete but here goes…

<I presume you refer to the wonders of OSX being in response to Apple's adoption of the Intel chip.  

Apple adopted Unix because the technology underpinning macOS 1-9 was choking performance, was unmaintainable in the face of continuing development and lacked standards compliance. And its replacements - Pink etc failed to deliver. People forget the cheers that went up when Jobs brought NextOS with him - in one fell swoop it leapfrogged Windows and set the scene for the next twenty years of dominance. Apple jumped to Intel when IBM/Motorola refused to produce CPUs suitable for Apple’s desktop machines, preferring instead to concentrate on the server market.

Apple has massively changed the underlying technology of macOS as well as its name.

<I think "aggressively" would be the more accurate term.  

Yep

QSA can barely keep up to that let alone the fact that it is not writing to Apple’s core technologies but rather to an open source, cross-platform third party framework that itself can’t keep up with Apple and Windows and whatever. And it introduces its own bugs and idiosyncracies.

<I can't argue your point here, and, with the Mac OS now dependent on Apple IOS people it is inevitable the low attention span people, the monkeys, now occupy the executive offices of the Circus.  They win.  I'l probably get an iPhone next year so I, too, can hold up the line at Walmart getting them to match the "best price" available locally for everything on my shopping list; but a Mini will remain my "hub" for the foreseeable future.>

You didn’t bite here so I’ll be more obvious: QSA gave itself a problem by committing to wxWidgets. The intention was to free themselves from Apple’s dominance and allow them to produce a Windows or even a Linux version if they wished (eg if the Mac tanked and died). With the advent of iOS that’s proven to be a mixed blessing with Apple being in a much better market position than when the decision was made but making the majority of its profits out of phones and pads - a platform that wxWidgets can’t or won’t support. OTOH using wxWidgets meant that you get a lowest common denominator product - no Apple specific technologies are supported and you have to deal with leakage of UI elements from other platforms as well as unimplemented features that are common on other fully compliant Apple apps. And how do you develop an iOS helix client with a third party framework that doesn’t support iOS?

Heaven forbid that QSA might find itself having to get out of wxWidgets and into Swift before Apple dumps Intel and heads for ARM. Stockpile your Intel boxes folks!

There are strong technical reasons for every change away from your beloved classical Helix. Not all are wanted, even by those who made them.

<I'd like to see some of those "strong technical reasons".  Like why the trash can was trashed?  Helix has many "parallel paths", and THAT one was fundamental.

The best way to see this is to be part of the beta program. There, for example (Report #8935 from the techdb, now publicly accessible after beta program completion), you discover that converting from ASCII /Mac Roman text to Unicode is no walk in the park, particularly since Apple has changed the underlying font description technology five times (5!!!) during the Helix 6 -> 7 transition. Here’s the recent discussion for this one bug:

---- Additional Comment from Matt Strange — May 28, 2015  4:06 PM ----

To enable Japanese:

1) Open Sys Pref -> Language & Region.

 1A) If "Japanese" is not in your list of Preferrred languages, click the [+] and add it.

2) Click the "Keyboard Preferences" and make sure "Kotoeri" is one of the Input Sources.

 2B) If not, click the [+] and add it.

3) Click "Show Input menu in the menu bar" — you'll see a little USA flag in your menu, since US English is your primary language.

4) n that menu you can choose various input methods: Pick one of the Japanese methods.

5) Switch to Helix (or anything that allows you to enter text) and start typing — your characters will be converted to Japanese glyphs according to whatever rules that input method uses.

6) Note that in Helix 6.2, your typing IS converted to Japanese, but when you leave the edit field, the text is converted to "glop" (e.g: typing "Hi" with Katakana input selected looks good, but results in "Éq" after the fact.)

* To REALLY test another language, open Sys Pref -> Language & Region and drag something non-English to the top of the Preferred languages list to make it the Primary language. Then close the Sys Pref panel. You'll get a dialog telling you to restart to get the full effect. (Prior to restart, you can reopen Sys Pref and you'll see your new language!)

Apparently a 'proper' OS X application does not require a restart to switch it's primary language: switch to Japanese, then launch Preview, Mail, etc. and you'll see the menus are in Japanese. But obviously there's something incomplete about this, or the Sys Pref wouldn't be suggesting a restart is necessary. 

---- Additional Comment from Matt Strange — May 28, 2015  4:42 PM ----

Further testing shows that these work (in relation to switching primary languages):

1) wxGrid & Inspector work for naming icons adding comments.

2) Entering data on a view works.

3) A sequence name displayed in a command rectangle.

4) Creating User menus and seeing them in User Mode

Further testing shows that these fail:

1) Non-roman text in a label or command rectangle. — Interestingly, entering "Hello" as 'Katakana' in a command rectangle results in a button with the label: "Englishhtml"

2) All OS X Controls: Static Popups, Checkboxes, Radio Buttons.

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Aug 02, 2015  3:18 PM ----

Fixed by LRA937.

wxWidgets 3.0 prefers using Core Text over ATSUI, but when they put in that mod, they failed to set the "changed font" when the font changed.  The fix is to add a line of code that does just that.

The Japanese issue was an incomplete implementation of Unicode for label rectangles.  I fixed that, but Japanese characters would render as square boxes when the text rectangle did not have focus.  This was fixed by turning on font substitution in the ATSUI code.

I have not tested making Japanese my primary language.

I want to note that ATSUI is now obsolete.  Doing Unicode rendering in Core Text is much easier and safer.  ATSUI requires UTF-16, which has been deemed the worst of both worlds, being an encoding that typically takes more space than UTF-8, but unlike UTF-32, is still a variable length encoding.  Core Text uses CFAttributedStringRefs, which seems to handle errors more smoothly.  Transitioning to Core Text should only take a few days.

---- Additional Comment from Matt Strange — Aug 10, 2015  1:30 PM ----

This doesn't appear to be fixed — I still can't change the font of any rectangle.

To be clear: this is changing the rectangle, not text within it. Just select the rectangle (label or data) and attempt to set the font to something other than the default.

Also note that I was only able to change selected text one time.

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Aug 16, 2015  11:51 PM ----

Fixed by LRA938. Well, that's a mystery. Chalk it up to magnetic monopoles. The fix that I put in managed to disappear. I put it back in.

---- Additional Comment from Matt Strange — Sep 22, 2015  9:51 AM ----

Some fonts work now, but most do not. An easy one: try setting a rectangle's font to Verdana Bold. (Verdana works, but not Verdana Bold.) About half of my fonts fail to be recognized.

Also, in wxWidgets2, they suppress '13' as a size because that is the 'default' size in their minds. I fixed this (and the font name, so e.g "Times Bold" is not "bold times") by modding the wx code. Perhaps you could create the appropriate hx... variant so we can avoid losing this change in the future. (If the basic framework is there, I can probably reapply my mods.

Also Also: I noted that for PostScript fonts, the PostScript name is shown (in single quotes) so that e.g. "Letter Gothic Bold Slanted" appears as 'bi letter gothic boldslanted' — and Japanese fonts are still not recognized, but that may be the same issue as the other 'font not recognized' issue.

Good news: command rectangles, radio buttons, checkboxes, and popus now show non-roman text. 

Bad news: Popups that allow typing still fail to show non-roman text. (R8974)

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Sep 27, 2015  8:32 PM ----

Fixed by LRA939.

This appears to be a combination of wxWidgets bugs and OS X bugs.  I have fixed the wxWidgets bugs.

When presented with a Core Text font, the wxWidgets code was failing to extract the Italic and Bold flags.  I fixed that, but there are still numerous fonts that cannot be forced into the wxFont data structure.

In addition, it appears that when many of the fonts in the font panel are selected, the system returns the system font instead.  There is not much that we can do about this.

---- Additional Comment from Matt — Dec 07, 2015  6:36 PM ----

These can't be OS X bugs, as these fonts work fine with Helix 6.2.4.

The last fix does indeed make more fonts available, but many (at leat 50% of mine) still fail. [related] issue: Helix handles fonts via an indexed list stored in an STL. That list is badly mangled upon conversion to Helix 7.0. (Attached is a before/after dissection, which you will see has particular trouble with long font names.)

Code-wise: look in HO_FontMap in hepuser.p (≈line 2770) for the code that starts the process, but fontuser.p is where the action is. Be sure to read your notes staring at ≈ line 190. (Particularly: "…there is a real need, and a real hurry, to change this design")

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Jan 08, 2016  4:42 PM ----

Fixed by LRA940.

There was an issue with the STL updating to UTF8, and I fixed that, but I can't explain how that issue affects the Font Panel.  With that fix in place, (or even simply creating a new Collection, which doesn't involve Update at all), there are still a few fonts that can be selected in the font panel that are interpretted as Lucida Grande 10.  This is the value that the font panel is delivering, and there is nothing we can do about it.  One example is Hiragina Kaku Gathic Std 10, which also fails in 6.2.4 (6053).

If there are other fonts that fail, but work correctly in 6.2.4 (6053), feel free to reopen this and identify the fonts that fail.

---- Document ‘R8935 get font list.scpt’ (0.01MB) Added by Matt — Mar 01, 2016  2:11 PM ----

OK, I'm working on a pair of scripts that demonstrate the problem. The first one ('R8935 get font list') simply puts a list of your fonts on the clipboard, so I can know which ones to focus on. It does no good to tell you to test 'font x' when you don't have it!

My seconds script goes through that list and uses AppleScript to set a label rectangle to each of those fonts. Both Helix 6.2 & 7.0 can successfully set the same fonts via AppleScript (with a couple of exceptions, the Apollo MT Expert and Arial Hebrew typefaces being discovered so far — these work in 6.2 but fail in 7.0.) The real issue is that where I can set "Avenir Book" via the Inspector in 6.2, 7.0 refuses, throwing it over to Lucide Grande. This is just one example of many, but until I know which fonts you do/do not have, I won't produce an exhaustive list.

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Mar 06, 2016  4:45 PM ----

Font list (from my laptop) placed in Private Discussion.

---- Additional Comment from Matt — Mar 08, 2016  6:08 PM ----

The private discussion now contains a list of fonts 'starting with A' that work in Helix 6.2, but fail in Helix 7.0. Some (Athelas & Avenir families) throw over to Lucida Grande, but some (Adobe Caslon Pro, Americal Typewriter, Arial Hebrew, Arno Pro) throw to a 'more standard' typeface in the same family.

Also attached a small collection with a label rectangle set to "Avenir Next Demi Bold" — this was done via AppleScript, and shows that wxWidgets _can_ interpret it in that direction, at least. it just can't set it accurately.

---- Additional Comment from Larry — Mar 13, 2016  6:04 PM ----

I give up, for now.

I found a very simple fix (look up fonts based on the display name rather than the font family name) that makes Avenir Next Demi Bold (and most of the others on the failure list) work perfectly, but it breaks Helvetica Bold, and many other of the more established fonts.  In my opinion, we should go with the lesser of two evils, and keep the older fonts working.  (I did make a significant attempt to have all fonts working at once, but the issues cascaded, and it was becoming a huge project.)

This issue stems from the fact that we are using the original QuickDraw font model and codes.  This has been deprecated for years.  Apple has progressed through no less than 5 font definition systems since we started:  QuickDraw, Font Manager, ATSUI, Core Graphics, and Core Text.  Each one of these provides more details and options than the previous.  Unfortunately, it is not always possible to represent a particular font in all of these systems.  Right now, we allow the user to select a Core Text font, but all of our internal processing is done using the QuickDraw model.  (It's amazing it works as well as it does.)

The real solution is to switch all of our processing to Core Text.  This is already a project for 7.0.1.  It does not seem productive to invest any more time in getting fonts to work in the current Helix using the QuickDraw model.  With Core Text, our users will be able to use all of the modern font features, including variable shadows and multiple underlines and strike-throughs.

Now if you’ve read this far let me just say I’m in absolute awe at the amount of invisible work that Matt, Larry and Steve do. There are over 9000 bugs in the database - only a fraction of which are active - all have this level of detailed discussion, most have been edited and cleaned up since very few on the beta program write to Matt’s requirements for relevance, brevity and succinctness. Beyond that they're doing testing (that usually means creating examples that show the fault and comparing with previous builds of helix to see where the fault was introduced) and coding and writing and whatever else is required to keep things progressing - year in year out. Gobsmacking.

I’m unsurprised that the manual is not yet up to date. It’s not a priority anywhere near the top of the list and won’t be until a complete newcomer to Helix actually shows interest let alone buys the product. Presumably Gil’s working on achieving that.

Lee

[Roland Spitzbarth]

Wow! Hard to believe a long time Helix user would do that when one of the true powers of Helix has aways been the ability to create elegant user solutions that don’t show all the structural clutter necessary for design. No offense, William, sorry, had to get that off my mind. Fact is I tremendously enjoy working with solutions I created many years ago like my bookkeeping program (surely primitive by Lenny’s standards…) and have hardly ever had to go back to design mode to change something. OTOH I totally sympathize with you about the confusing new design interface. But even a dummy like me has been able to eventually figure it out - with invaluable help from this list, no less. OTOH again I learneda  long time ago that with computers you never ask „why“ - you just accept what is and roll with the changes. What this does in the long run to the human mind and the precision and sharpness of thinking that our generation has grown up with, is yet another question.

Just my two bits.

Roland.

Roland Spitzbarth

sp...@spitzbarth.com

[Hel...@realpeople.com]

Steven 

BMW, I owned a 1987 for 10 years with the best cruise control on one stick hands down…. I loved that cruise system … I no longer own a 535 or any BMW of an series…. I loved my old one. 

Ray 

I refuse to believe I'm as stupid as I feel at this point in the "upgrade" process.  I don't recall a "Read me" in the installation process...just drag 'n drop.  Upgrading directly from 6.1 to 7.0, I may need to read the 6.2 notes.

WRB

[fred]

[Originator's address is fred.st...@communication-unltd.com]

Was that the BMW you had when you were here?

Best

Fred

>
> For the last 10 years, I’ve owned a BMW 6 series with adaptive cruise
> control. It had the most intuitive, fast, and easy to use cruise
> control system I’ve ever used. Hands down better than anything. It was
> all based on a left sided stalk below the light control stalk. So much
> better than pushing little buttons on the steering wheel.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html
[Originator's address is fred.st...@communication-unltd.com]

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Roland,

Comments interspersed below in bold and "< >".

Regards,

WRB

On Jan 3, 2017, at 4:56 AM, Roland Spitzbarth wrote:

Wow! Hard to believe a long time Helix user would do that when one of the true powers of Helix has aways been the ability to create elegant user solutions that don’t show all the structural clutter necessary for design. No offense, William, sorry, had to get that off my mind.

<None taken.  I did not rush to computers back when the choice was Radio Shack and/or learn Cobol, etc.  I waited for what turned out to be the Mac.  I'm still that same person.  To me, the computer and related software are tools.

When I buy a hammer, or a skill saw, or a screwdriver, I buy tools.  When a hammer must be replaced, I choose another of the traditional design I am used to.  It serves my purposes.  Those in the trades probably choose the more modern, expensive ones.  That's fine.

In the same sense, I'm of the same mind with Helix.  With the possible exception of pasting structure or list sorting, none of the "improvements" are of the slightest use or incentive to me to upgrade.  Unfortunately, the Apple decision to change chips "way back when" leaves me at a hardware "dead end" when it comes to faster operation, more storage, and the availability of compatible new programs that seem to offer promise; and so I could not ignore OSX and I cannot remain forever here with a 2006 Intel Mini.

The need to maintain a PPC machine for my unconverted word processing archives and Helix has not heretofore beebn avoidable.  Now my purchase of 7.0 has made the investment of time to become mentally functional in it a question of when instead of whether.>

Fact is I tremendously enjoy working with solutions I created many years ago like my bookkeeping program (surely primitive by Lenny’s standards…) and have hardly ever had to go back to design mode to change something.

<Yes, my relations and collections remain both useful and satisfying.  Over the years, however, I have found my increased perception occasionally requires new fields and/or summaries.  Whole relations have been duplicated and "repurposed" to store and manipulate new information.  But my use has NEVER involved moving out of Design Mode for any purpose whatsoever.>

OTOH I totally sympathize with you about the confusing new design interface. But even a dummy like me has been able to eventually figure it out - with invaluable help from this list, no less.

I must say that 7.0 significantly differs from the application I knew (to the extent necessary) and loved.  The simplistic way I use Helix has only been more complicated by the changes of recent years.  Even my last upgrade to 6.1 was less than a joyful experience.

By and large, available development notes do not explain some fundamental changes.  The use of color and new icons I find irritating, but understand this was necessary to avoid copyright issues.  Because 7.0 will allow "my" database to run on even the next (last?) version of the Mini (which I hope will serve me through my final years), and the fact that no one has volunteered to write a "skin" to revert them to the originals, I'll live with this because no viable choice is available.>

OTOH again I learneda  long time ago that with computers you never ask „why“ - you just accept what is and roll with the changes.

<I guess this goes along with the philosophy of accepting that which one cannot change.  But I'm from the generation(s) where everyone believed that  "The customer is always right".  Customer demand eventually forced Henry Ford to offer choices in color (although the choice of "Black" remained available.

That takes us back to the "why" as to our computers and software being such a conspicuous exception.  When external forces cost me time and money I'n NOT happy and want very much to know "why".  No type "A" personality is comfortable following others without knowing and accepting adopted goals.>

What this does in the long run to the human mind and the precision and sharpness of thinking that our generation has grown up with, is yet another question.

<The "invisible hand" of capitalism will eventually prevail, which likely means that personal local backups and the Mac OS will be replaced by "the Cloud" and IOS.  Whether the work product of future generations is better or worse will be judged when history makes such comparison easy and accurate.  

The never-ending challenges of social maturity and personal interactions between humans are entirely separate.  Their generational effect will be both significant and without end, yet today we can only guess as to the specifics of same.

In the short term no one is going to do the "grunt work" to summarize complex research or other number crunching on an iPhone or an iPad.  In-depth political discussion will never move to Twitter.  Nonetheless, one day the necessary "chip" will almost certainly be imbedded in our flesh; and display in "HUD" fashion on our eyeballs.>

[Gib Henry]

Seems to me one can spend all one’s energy fighting the inevitable, or use that same energy to learn how to use the inevitable.  Sooner is better, because inevitably there will be other earth-shattering changes.  Going from a horse and carriage directly to a car is much harder than going from a 1917 Ford to a 1933 Packard to a 2000 Dodge to a 2017 Chevrolet.

[Lenny Eiger]

Greetings everyone.

There is only one thing I can think to say here. I will paraphrase and echo Gib's sentiment: "Get over it". Further, if all goes well it will get worse.

This is a huge upgrade. There are many things under the hood that needed to be changed. I won't be surprised if certain things don't work. I was in the Beta program, but I didn't really have the time to help this beta cycle - and neither did some of the other "usual suspects". Just as always, if something doesn't work, report it.

It isn't going to operate as it did before, things have to change. I think it's actually better. The Inspector is a huge move forward. It got a lot of upgrades and will continue to present a centralized set of properties for every item in the database. It's also a model for a system where any one of those properties can be accessed and modified.

If Helix is to succeed even a little it needs to have considerably improved interoperability. It needs to be able to talk to any other database there is, on any operating system, from Mac to Linux to Windows to iOS. A Server to be able to listen on multiple ports, speak SQL, possibly nosql, maybe Swift, certainly be able to integrate REST services - natively. It needs to be able to accommodate a plug-in architecture so that people can access it from anywhere, and write plugins to whatever app they need, from SalesForce to Wordpress, and everything else....  Essentially, it needs to implement the standards that everyone else uses so people will want to work with it. Are we playing catch-up? I'lll let you answer that...

The database needs a rewrite, from the ground up, so we can make it into the modern era and have an offering with some possibilities for new people, both clients and developers. If Helix only serves its existing customers, it will slowly go out of business. If it can't grow, get more acceptance in the marketplace, have new clients, then there is no point to all the hard work they've been doing.

Along the way you all might want to learn a little applescript, javascript, PHP, SQL and a few other things. There are endless resources available from people to books, ebooks, web sites, and plenty more. It's no dig deal. If there is one thing I've learned about the software busioess in the last 30 years, it's that you need to keep learning. Young computer science graduates are expected to learn a new language every few months. One has to keep one's mind flexible. Things WILL change.

I also think we ought to drop a few of the legacy features we don't need so a rewrite can be done faster. (Auto-Open posts, for example [sorry, Michael], possibly more than one level of subform on a template.) 

I'm not interested in Helix's past (amusingly checkered as it may be), I'm interested in its future...

Lenny

ei...@databright.com

[Bill Spencer]

+1

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Lenny, Gib, Bill

I understand.  Your consensus is that only your perspective is worthy of consideration, that  of those whose livelihood demands constant change "go with the flow (or any flow) without challenge or question.  I see it as quick, simple, and fundamentally wrong.

Actually, we agree on some big "issues".  I, too, want Helix/QSA to succeed.  Without progress from where things are now there is no future.  So it comes down to where QSA takes Helix from here.  With no proper manual to introduce Helix to a beginner purchaser, who will be the "target customer"?  This isn't a product that "word of mouth" can sell in the necessary quantity to do anything.

QSA can't rely on the "well" of finances represented by our "pros", people on this list who use Server and Client, to fund much more.  Nonetheless, Lenny wants "many things under the hood...changed."  He believes "interoperability" to be the key.  I can't argue, because I don't see much of a future for Helix under Apple IOS, the "future" Apple apparently believes to be "where the money is".  

He admits "If Helix only serves its existing customers, it will slowly go out of business.  If it can't grow, get more acceptance in the marketplace, there is no point to all the hard work they've been doing."  Once again, I completely agree.  But where is the funding for Lenny's "wish list" in his forth paragraph?   I don't believe it possible to "get there from here", given present circumstance and related "once-deep pockets".  

I've said this before, but the truth in it has not changed.  Aircraft salesmen and the fixed base operators and mechanics all make most of their money from advanced pilots, those who own "advanced" aircraft, turbocharged or turbine singles, twins, jets or warbirds.  Nonetheless they know if they don't offer training to those who don't yet fly, they, too, will "...slowly go out of business."  

Everything I have heard from Gil is that they see no future in singe users like me.  The number of Apple desktops and professional laptops is tanking as we speak.  Those who buy and use such machines, like pilots, are today also vanishing breed. 

Truth be known, there have NEVER been many individual computer users able and willing become productive in their own database, even when it's bundled by Apple or provided at work by their employer.  I would even go so far as to question the validity of any business model based solely on "young computer science graduates".  With their education and options, they don't need Helix at all.

No NEW potential purchasers of Helix today are likely to accept prerequisites such as "...a little applescript, javascript, PHP, SQL and a few other things" to come "on board for a demonstration".  Each will expect tangible built-in capability as the "price of admission" or participation.  NONE will put out money for mere potential.

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

In WW II, those in charge understood the need to "freeze" EVERY design as soon as it was "good enough" and produce it in numbers.  Only when the product was "in theater, in number with trained operators and maintenance" could it contribute to the actual fight and eventual victory.  

It's time to pick a target audience and get Helix capable of serving those specific needs.  There is NO MARKET for the present product, which should have been frozen in terms of "features" LONG AGO.  The marketplace must soon perceive the purchase of Helix as a "need" by many more than a few SOON if the lights are to stay on at QSA.  Anything else is just wishful thinking.

First priority should be a complete, well written manual.  Unfortunately associated funding must come from 7.0 sales.  The same is true for necessary subsequent product promotion.  At some point crossed fingers ceases to be a business plan.

Regards,

WRB

-- 

[Gib Henry]

More like “get on with it,” Lenny, but you ran with the idea!  +2!  Cheers,
--
Gib

[develix]

Bonjour a tous et tous mes voeux pour 2017

voila bientôt 25 ans  fred stephenson et moi avons entrepris de traduire helix express des manuels complet en français existe et un package complet

fred a développer énormément de solution externe pour épauler les fonctionnalités de helix manquante rarement mis en avant pas QSA

(client mail,heliport,un outil pour intégrer automatiquement via un serveur FTP des données et tout un tas de module complémentaire)

la société DEVELIX a acquis une cinquantaine de license (Helix RAD,Engine ,et Serveur)

QSA a fait énormément de travail et progrès même si des bugs existe

mais l’avenir et l’ouverture n’est pas d’actualité un temps énorme et passé a la signature de non divulgation sur des techniques obsolètes

le secret est devenu la règle a toutes communication une vrai paranoïa

la vision unique d’une manière de voir et devenu une permanence

j’ai perdu ans après ans toutes les bases que mes clients utilisaient 

les raisons sont simple vitesse insuffisante au passage a os x impossibilités de développer des applications pendant leur utilisation

utilisation de wxWidgets pour rendre compatible windows a l’origine de ce choix et aujourd’hui toujours pas d’actualité

la dernière annonce en date le client « web » est reporté a une date ultérieur

la non communication avec les développeurs pour débattre de leur vrai besoin l’association avec de jeunes dévelloppeurs

tout cela n’existe pas alors que c’est la base de financement future

je ne parle même pas du programme applescript arrêter on ne sait pourquoi ???

actuellement la communication ce limite a combien de $ voulez vous investir ou pour régler votre problème il vous faudra X USU

tout cela deviens insupportable et automatiquement oblige doucement mais surement de ne plus utiliser helix

voila vous allez peut être me trouver amère mais les réalités ne sont pas forcément facile a entendre

cordialement

PS le slogan d’origine de Helix « Pour ceux qui ne pense pas en code » on s’éloigne a grand pas de ce slogan

Hervé RABAUD

406 allée des chênes

38760 Varces

fixe 0476986938

portable 0633287039

h.ra...@develix.fr

[Roland Spitzbarth]

[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]

+3 Hervé!
(Tu penses vraiment que les Américains vont lire un texte ainsi long en Français?…)
Salutations cordiales de Suisse
Roland.

>
> PS le slogan d’origine de Helix « Pour ceux qui ne pense pas en code » on s’éloigne a grand pas de ce slogan

@ Lenny, Gib et al:
This is actually the central point. Roll with the changes, keep moving forward, don’t look back - is all well and right but what is really happening is a widening gap between the dumb masses („users“) and the „experts“. This is in turn welcomed by the diminishing number of people and conglomerates controlling an ever increasing share of wealth and information who are interested in the growing number of not-haves only as dumb workers and consumers. We are seeing a powerful mega-trend here, basically a function of overpopulation. Greetings to Mose 1.28. The democratization of information and wealth that we all hoped for in the seventies of the last century has proved to be a short lived phenomenon.
Small pockets of pooled information like this list might make a difference for a while.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]

[fred]

Just for your comprehension I will try to provide an approximate translation.

---------------------------

Hi all. My best wishes for 2017

it is now about 25 years since Fred and I undertook the complete translation of Helix Express into French (manuals and software).
Fred has developed a lot of external solutions to cater for missing Helix functionality. A mail client, Heliport, a tool that automates data entry via FTP as well as a number of other tools.
Develix  acquired  approximately 50 licences (RADE, Engine and Servers)

QSA has undertaken an enormous amount of work even though bugs still exist.
However future plans are still not publicly available. An enormous amount of time has passed requiring NDA signatures for obsolete technologies.
Secrecy has become the norm for communication, a real paranoia.
A blinkered vision has become the standard.
Year by year I have lost customers and databases and the reasons are quite simple :
- slow adoption of OSX
- impossibility to develop whilst the collection is running
- the use of wxwidgets to provide Windows compatibility, the original reason for this choice and yet still not available.
 the latest announcement that the "web" client has been moved back to a date in the future
 a lack of communication with developers to discuss the real neccessity to attract young developers
all of which is inexistant but which should be the basis of future financing.
Not to mention the cessation of the Applescript progam, for some unknown reason.

At the moment communication is limited to how many dollars you want to invest or alternatively in order to solve your problem you need to purchase X USU's.
All of this has become insupportable and slowly but surely forces us to stop using Helix

So there you have it, I may sound bitter but the reality is not necessarily easy to accept.

Best regards

PS. The distance from the original slogan "For those that don't think in code" is becoming even greater.

---------------------------

Bonjour a tous et tous mes voeux pour 2017

voila bientôt 25 ans  fred stephenson et moi avons entrepris de traduire helix express des manuels complet en français existe et un package complet

fred a développer énormément de solution externe pour épauler les fonctionnalités de helix manquante rarement mis en avant pas QSA

(client mail,heliport,un outil pour intégrer automatiquement via un serveur FTP des données et tout un tas de module complémentaire)

la société DEVELIX a acquis une cinquantaine de license (Helix RAD,Engine ,et Serveur)

QSA a fait énormément de travail et progrès même si des bugs existe

mais l’avenir et l’ouverture n’est pas d’actualité un temps énorme et passé a la signature de non divulgation sur des techniques obsolètes

le secret est devenu la règle a toutes communication une vrai paranoïa

la vision unique d’une manière de voir et devenu une permanence

j’ai perdu ans après ans toutes les bases que mes clients utilisaient 

les raisons sont simple vitesse insuffisante au passage a os x impossibilités de développer des applications pendant leur utilisation

utilisation de wxWidgets pour rendre compatible windows a l’origine de ce choix et aujourd’hui toujours pas d’actualité

la dernière annonce en date le client « web » est reporté a une date ultérieur

la non communication avec les développeurs pour débattre de leur vrai besoin l’association avec de jeunes dévelloppeurs

tout cela n’existe pas alors que c’est la base de financement future

je ne parle même pas du programme applescript arrêter on ne sait pourquoi ???

actuellement la communication ce limite a combien de $ voulez vous investir ou pour régler votre problème il vous faudra X USU

tout cela deviens insupportable et automatiquement oblige doucement mais surement de ne plus utiliser helix

voila vous allez peut être me trouver amère mais les réalités ne sont pas forcément facile a entendre

cordialement

PS le slogan d’origine de Helix « Pour ceux qui ne pense pas en code » on s’éloigne a grand pas de ce slogan

[Ron Jenkins]

The value of Helix is in the interface, not the database. There's plenty of high-quality free options that hopefully can be used.

I believe Frontbase made an offer, once.

Ron

[Elton Darby]

There's plenty of high-quality free options

Like the "drop-in replacement" for MySQL, MariaDB ( https://mariadb.org )

Elton

-------------------

Sent from my iPhone

[develix wanadoo]

[Originator's address is dev...@wanadoo.fr]

bonjour et tous mes voeux roland

ça permet de voir s’il feront comme moi j’ai fait l’effort de l’écrire peut être feront ils l’effort de le lire

bien cordialement Roland

Le 5 janv. 2017 à 11:04, Roland Spitzbarth <Hel...@realpeople.com> a écrit :

[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]

+3 Hervé!
(Tu penses vraiment que les Américains vont lire un texte ainsi long en Français?…)
Salutations cordiales de Suisse
Roland.

>

> PS le slogan d’origine de Helix « Pour ceux qui ne pense pas en code » on s’éloigne a grand pas de ce slogan

@ Lenny, Gib et al:
This is actually the central point. Roll with the changes, keep moving forward, don’t look back - is all well and right but what is really happening is a widening gap between the dumb masses („users“) and the „experts“. This is in turn welcomed by the diminishing number of people and conglomerates controlling an ever increasing share of wealth and information who are interested in the growing number of not-haves only as dumb workers and consumers. We are seeing a powerful mega-trend here, basically a function of overpopulation. Greetings to Mose 1.28. The democratization of information and wealth that we all hoped for in the seventies of the last century has proved to be a short lived phenomenon.
Small pockets of pooled information like this list might make a difference for a while.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html
[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is dev...@wanadoo.fr]

[Lenny Eiger]

[Originator's address is ei...@databright.com]

> On Jan 4, 2017, at 7:02 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Lenny, Gib, Bill
>
> I understand. Your consensus is that only your perspective is worthy of consideration, that of those whose livelihood demands constant change "go with the flow (or any flow) without challenge or question. I see it as quick, simple, and fundamentally wrong.

We are discussing things here, not simply putting out our ideas as "unequivocal". I am plenty able to listen and learn from any reasonable argument, and so are the others. However, I have a very different view than you do.

My views are those of someone who is a professional in this business, who needs a professional tool. I also, with integrity, need to be able to convince others that its the right tool for their business as well.. I have never believed that Helix was for "people who don't think in code". I think its an entirely unsupportable idea, and that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Like many here, one can make a good beginning. It's a lot of work to make an integrated system (and run a business),. The only good thing that has come from this is that I have made a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level.

> Actually, we agree on some big "issues". I, too, want Helix/QSA to succeed. Without progress from where things are now there is no future. So it comes down to where QSA takes Helix from here. With no proper manual to introduce Helix to a beginner purchaser, who will be the "target customer"? This isn't a product that "word of mouth" can sell in the necessary quantity to do anything.

Manuals are a thing of the past. Today they have a saying: TL:DR. It stands for "too long, didn't read." There is often a reference to the functions, and people are expected to do a little study on their own. Apple's new language, Swift comes with extensive references, but no manual, and extremely poor explanations. They rely on people to do online tutorials, and to be resourceful in very specific ways. A new iPhone comes with two sentences of instructions, an Apple Watch, just one.

And BTW, speaking of Swift, Apple made their new language for the very same reasons that I am suggesting that Helix be interoperable. They needed a language that was base on C and C++ so that coders would use it. Objective C came from very different roots and was much too foreign for people to pick it up. So they changed...

>
> QSA can't rely on the "well" of finances represented by our "pros", people on this list who use Server and Client, to fund much more. Nonetheless, Lenny wants "many things under the hood...changed." He believes "interoperability" to be the key. I can't argue, because I don't see much of a future for Helix under Apple IOS, the "future" Apple apparently believes to be "where the money is".

We are going to iOS. I do not want to be insulting... sincerely. However, it you don't see the trend towards mobile operating systems, then you are covering your eyes with something. 80% of web pages being accessed today are being accessed by a smartphone. That's not a little trend, that's a shift. A completed shift.

The pace of change is increasing exponentially. Self driving cars are already on the road. Almost every single person has a smartphone, complete with access to much of the knowledge of everything in human history. Sure, you can buy things and order a movie ticket, but also have access to Wikipedia, Stack Overflow and all the other resources. I could go on, but we all know these things...

> He admits "If Helix only serves its existing customers, it will slowly go out of business. If it can't grow, get more acceptance in the marketplace, there is no point to all the hard work they've been doing." Once again, I completely agree. But where is the funding for Lenny's "wish list" in his forth paragraph? I don't believe it possible to "get there from here", given present circumstance and related "once-deep pockets".

It's true. The only way forward for Helix is to get investment to build a new, modern database.

> Truth be known, there have NEVER been many individual computer users able and willing become productive in their own database, even when it's bundled by Apple or provided at work by their employer. I would even go so far as to question the validity of any business model based solely on "young computer science graduates". With their education and options, they don't need Helix at all.

> No NEW potential purchasers of Helix today are likely to accept prerequisites such as "...a little applescript, javascript, PHP, SQL and a few other things" to come "on board for a demonstration". Each will expect tangible built-in capability as the "price of admission" or participation. NONE will put out money for mere potential.

This isn't mere potential. This is playing on the field where you live - you don't try to play soccer with football pads, or vice versa. Given Helix's current strength in that area, it's silly not to learn a little AppleScript.

There is a huge market for Helix if they want to grab it. Currently, there is FileMaker at the low end, and Access (which is a joke). Higher up, you have the sql engines, and the larger ERP systems. If one wants a custom database built, there are very few options at the lower cost point. It could easily cost a million dollars or more to get into SAP, for example, which everyone hates. There are also canned packages, which tend to be annoying for almost everyone.

There are also smaller canned packages such as SalesForce, that address one area of business (CRM). Salesforce has grown to a place where they can integrate with any database despite their simple beginnings. Many companies put together a smattering of different packages, one for CRM, and other for Project Mgmt, Accting, and so on. There is very little that is integrated. It ends up being very costly vs an integrated system.

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

> The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested. Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful. I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is ei...@databright.com]

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Lenny,

Comments interspersed below in bold and "< >".

Regards,

WRB

-- 

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Lenny Eiger wrote:

[Originator's address is ei...@databright.com]

On Jan 4, 2017, at 7:02 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Hi Lenny, Gib, Bill

I understand.  Your consensus is that only your perspective is worthy of consideration, that  of those whose livelihood demands constant change "go with the flow (or any flow) without challenge or question.  I see it as quick, simple, and fundamentally wrong.

We are discussing things here, not simply putting out our ideas as "unequivocal".

<Sorry, but the words and context I was responding to were very much to the point that :"This is the way it, suck it up.">

I am plenty able to listen and learn from any reasonable argument, and so are the others. However, I have a very different view than you do.  

<I believe I clearly acknowledged that.>

My views are those of someone who is a professional in this business, who needs a professional tool. I also, with integrity, need to be able to convince others that its the right tool for their business as well.

<You state the obvious, and you are entitled to those views.  While a majority on this list may agree with you, could any of you explain to me where NEW PURCHASERS of Helix will come from?  The number of licenses being purchased for 7.0 is likely WAY less than before. What, precisely, is likely to change that dead-end trend?>

I have never believed that Helix was for "people who don't think in code". I think its an entirely unsupportable idea, and that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Like many here, one can make a good beginning. It's a lot of work to make an integrated system (and run a business),. The only good thing that has come from this is that I have made a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level.

<I respectfully disagree.  You're riding a dead horse.  Is it not obvious that the number of people able to make "...a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level" has NEVER been large?  The current pool of NEW "people who don't think in code" don't even know that Helix 7.0 exists.  QSA has no funds with which to create or stock such a pool.>

Actually, we agree on some big "issues".  I, too, want Helix/QSA to succeed.  Without progress from where things are now there is no future.  So it comes down to where QSA takes Helix from here.  With no proper manual to introduce Helix to a beginner purchaser, who will be the "target customer"?  This isn't a product that "word of mouth" can sell in the necessary quantity to do anything.

Manuals are a thing of the past. Today they have a saying: TL:DR. It stands for "too long, didn't read." There is often a reference to the functions, and people are expected to do a little study on their own. Apple's new language, Swift comes with extensive references, but no manual, and extremely poor explanations. They rely on people to do online tutorials, and to be resourceful in very specific ways.

<Again, you speak as a professional.  There have NEVER been enough "professionals" to support the ongoing efforts necessary to keep Helix functional considering Apple's migration to a single IOS-compatible OSX.  Is Helix available through the Apple Store?

Just how many NEW clients have you found over the last decade that aren't from this list?  THAT'S unsustainable.

A new iPhone comes with two sentences of instructions, an Apple Watch, just one.  

<With all due respect, Apple can do anything it wants.  It's the "500 lb. canary, richer than Croesus.  They can make many mistakes and survive.  QSA can't make ANY.  

There's a world of difference between a purchaser being to function on a cell phone and being able to access and effectively utilize all the features actually built in.  The same is presumably true of the Apple watch.  

I would estimate I only use 30% of what Helix is capable of.  Nonetheless, that 30% made it of inestimable value to me, a program I won't be without.  

At the same time, let's be honest.  About all I need buy from QSA in the future is decent documentation and examples of how to utilize what I have already purchased.  I don't NEED more features now that Helix is (barely) functional in OSX.  I can't access much of what is already there!

And BTW, speaking of Swift, Apple made their new language for the very same reasons that I am suggesting that Helix be interoperable. They needed a language that was base on C and  C++ so that coders would use it. Objective C came from very different roots and was much too foreign for people to pick it up. So they changed...

<Irrelevant to any exchange with a typical" Mac owner/operator.>

QSA can't rely on the "well" of finances represented by our "pros", people on this list who use Server and Client, to fund much more.  Nonetheless, Lenny wants "many things under the hood...changed."  He believes "interoperability" to be the key.  I can't argue, because I don't see much of a future for Helix under Apple IOS, the "future" Apple apparently believes to be "where the money is".  

We are going to iOS. I do not want to be insulting... sincerely. However, it you don't see the trend towards mobile operating systems, then you are covering your eyes with something. 80% of web pages being accessed today are being accessed by a smartphone. That's not a little trend, that's a shift. A completed shift.

<I see the trend, and agreed with you as to the inevitability of IOS, love it or hate it.>

The pace of change is increasing exponentially. Self driving cars are already on the road. Almost every single person has a smartphone, complete with access to much of the knowledge of everything in human history. Sure, you can buy things and order a movie ticket, but also have access to Wikipedia, Stack Overflow and all the other resources. I could go on, but we all know these things...

<Once again, I agree; but it would is folly to presume all change is good.  Timeliness is everything.  

The basic formula for success has remained constant:  FInd a need and fill it.  The "trick" is that one's perspective must correctly judge the difference between a "want" and a "need".

If Gutenberg had done a survey before inventing a movable type printing press, he would have known that only 2-3% of those of his time were literate.  We might not read about him today, but his personal quality of life life would have been much better had he not died broke.  

He admits "If Helix only serves its existing customers, it will slowly go out of business.  If it can't grow, get more acceptance in the marketplace, there is no point to all the hard work they've been doing."  Once again, I completely agree.  But where is the funding for Lenny's "wish list" in his forth paragraph?   I don't believe it possible to "get there from here", given present circumstance and related "once-deep pockets".  

It's true. The only way forward for Helix is to get investment to build a new, modern database.

<So what "path forward" to such investment do you see?  I'm sure QSA would be all ears.

Truth be known, there have NEVER been many individual computer users able and willing become productive in their own database, even when it's bundled by Apple or provided at work by their employer.  I would even go so far as to question the validity of any business model based solely on "young computer science graduates".  With their education and options, they don't need Helix at all.

No NEW potential purchasers of Helix today are likely to accept prerequisites such as "...a little applescript, javascript, PHP, SQL and a few other things" to come "on board for a demonstration".  Each will expect tangible built-in capability as the "price of admission" or participation.  NONE will put out money for mere potential.

This isn't mere potential. This is playing on the field where you live - you don't try to play soccer with football pads, or vice versa. Given Helix's current strength in that area, it's silly not to learn a little AppleScript.

<WHAT "strength"?  WHAT "area".  If fully utilizing Helix 7.0 still requires users to learn Applescript, that's about as logical as requiring it of Mac purchasers.  Your perspective is one of terminal myopia.

There is a huge market for Helix if they want to grab it. Currently, there is FileMaker at the low end, and Access (which is a joke). Higher up, you have the sql engines, and the larger ERP systems. If one wants a custom database built, there are very few options at the lower cost point. It could easily cost a million dollars or more to get into SAP, for example, which everyone hates. There are also canned packages, which tend to be annoying for almost everyone.

There are also smaller canned packages such as SalesForce, that address one area of business (CRM). Salesforce has grown to a place where they can integrate with any database despite their simple beginnings. Many companies put together a smattering of different packages, one for CRM, and other for Project Mgmt, Accting, and so on. There is very little that is integrated. It ends up being very costly vs an integrated system.

<I'll accept Filemaker as a "standalone" solution for some small businesses.  Is Panorama still around?  Is Numbers a joke?  As of now, Helix isn't even a consideration for consumer purchase.>

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

<Not without a reasonably complete tutorial and/or manual.>

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

<So you REALLY think that software accessible ONLY by those who have taken computer science at the college level make a "pool" of the size QSA needs to throw their hook and bobber into for a "future"?  Now THAT'S funny!

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful.  I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

<I am reminded of the admonition to not throw the baby out with the bath water.  No matter how much changes at what pace, the necessity to be able to perceive the difference between wheat and chaff remains.

[Hel...@realpeople.com]

Nous les Canadiens peuvent le lire aisément. 

Eh oui ce sont des commentaires qui sont vrais, mais qui peuvent être dit même d’Apple qui nous ont bien couté une base de données et tout un investissement quand ils nous ont abandonnés.  Alors QSA n’est malheureusement pas les seules à nous faire perdre du temps ou de l’argent. 

Raymond

Us Canadiens can read your comments easily.  And yes, your comments are true, but the same can be said of Apple who has cost us a full database development when they abandonned us.  Thus, QSA unfortunately are not the only ones that have caused us to lose time or money. 

On Jan 5, 2017, at 1:12 PM, develix wanadoo <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

[Originator's address is dev...@wanadoo.fr]

bonjour et tous mes voeux roland

ça permet de voir s’il feront comme moi j’ai fait l’effort de l’écrire peut être feront ils l’effort de le lire

bien cordialement Roland



Le 5 janv. 2017 à 11:04, Roland Spitzbarth <Hel...@realpeople.com> a écrit :

[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]

+3 Hervé!
(Tu penses vraiment que les Américains vont lire un texte ainsi long en Français?…)
Salutations cordiales de Suisse
Roland.

PS le slogan d’origine de Helix « Pour ceux qui ne pense pas en code » on s’éloigne a grand pas de ce slogan

@ Lenny, Gib et al:
This is actually the central point. Roll with the changes, keep moving forward, don’t look back - is all well and right but what is really happening is a widening gap between the dumb masses („users“) and the „experts“. This is in turn welcomed by the diminishing number of people and conglomerates controlling an ever increasing share of wealth and information who are interested in the growing number of not-haves only as dumb workers and consumers. We are seeing a powerful mega-trend here, basically a function of overpopulation. Greetings to Mose 1.28. The democratization of information and wealth that we all hoped for in the seventies of the last century has proved to be a short lived phenomenon.
Small pockets of pooled information like this list might make a difference for a while.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>.  Google archive
since 20 August 2006:  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.  
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:  
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is sp...@spitzbarth.com]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>.  Google archive
since 20 August 2006:  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.  
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:  
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is dev...@wanadoo.fr]

[Lenny Eiger]

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:10 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Hi Lenny,

Comments interspersed below in bold and "< >".

Regards,

WRB

-- 

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Lenny Eiger wrote:

My views are those of someone who is a professional in this business, who needs a professional tool. I also, with integrity, need to be able to convince others that its the right tool for their business as well.

<You state the obvious, and you are entitled to those views.  While a majority on this list may agree with you, could any of you explain to me where NEW PURCHASERS of Helix will come from?  The number of licenses being purchased for 7.0 is likely WAY less than before. What, precisely, is likely to change that dead-end trend?>

I believe there is a substantial market space available for Helix. One just needs to create a modern application and tell people that it exists. Marketing, the kind everyone else does these days.

I have never believed that Helix was for "people who don't think in code". I think its an entirely unsupportable idea, and that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Like many here, one can make a good beginning. It's a lot of work to make an integrated system (and run a business),. The only good thing that has come from this is that I have made a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level.

<I respectfully disagree.  You're riding a dead horse.  Is it not obvious that the number of people able to make "...a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level" has NEVER been large?  The current pool of NEW "people who don't think in code" don't even know that Helix 7.0 exists.  QSA has no funds with which to create or stock such a pool.>

There used to be a very vibrant Helix community of developers, somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 or so. This is during the time when Odesta was running things, a most incompetent group of people when it came to marketing, working with Apple, working with their developers, etc.

<Again, you speak as a professional.  There have NEVER been enough "professionals" to support the ongoing efforts necessary to keep Helix functional considering Apple's migration to a single IOS-compatible OSX.  Is Helix available through the Apple Store?

This is a very big story, with many components. There were a lot of developers, and many good ones. IMO, it is Helix's lack of support over the years that created this problem.

Just how many NEW clients have you found over the last decade that aren't from this list?  THAT'S unsustainable.

Yes, it is unsustainable. I have not been able to sell a new company on database software that was aging, and not keeping up with the times. There were many days that their demise looked imminent. If they had something to compete with this would be a different set of issues.

And BTW, speaking of Swift, Apple made their new language for the very same reasons that I am suggesting that Helix be interoperable. They needed a language that was base on C and  C++ so that coders would use it. Objective C came from very different roots and was much too foreign for people to pick it up. So they changed...

<Irrelevant to any exchange with a typical" Mac owner/operator.>

Unless one is curious about why Apple is where it is in the programming world, and where it is going, what its future possibilities are.

The pace of change is increasing exponentially. Self driving cars are already on the road. Almost every single person has a smartphone, complete with access to much of the knowledge of everything in human history. Sure, you can buy things and order a movie ticket, but also have access to Wikipedia, Stack Overflow and all the other resources. I could go on, but we all know these things...

<Once again, I agree; but it would is folly to presume all change is good.  Timeliness is everything.  

The basic formula for success has remained constant:  FInd a need and fill it. 

Generally, I would agree. Of course there are many cases where companies have created needs, but that's a minor point.

It's true. The only way forward for Helix is to get investment to build a new, modern database.

<So what "path forward" to such investment do you see?  I'm sure QSA would be all ears.

I'm sure they are thinking about this, and have probably made all sorts of inquiries already. They get my opinions regularly, whether they like them or not... However, they didn't need me to figure this out..

This isn't mere potential. This is playing on the field where you live - you don't try to play soccer with football pads, or vice versa. Given Helix's current strength in that area, it's silly not to learn a little AppleScript.

<WHAT "strength"?  WHAT "area".  If fully utilizing Helix 7.0 still requires users to learn Applescript, that's about as logical as requiring it of Mac purchasers.  Your perspective is one of terminal myopia.

I started out in Helix knowing little about databases. It's been a long time now, and I've learned a great deal. One of the things I learned was not to be afraid of traditional coding. AppleScript can be very useful.

There is a huge market for Helix if they want to grab it. Currently, there is FileMaker at the low end, and Access (which is a joke). Higher up, you have the sql engines, and the larger ERP systems. If one wants a custom database built, there are very few options at the lower cost point. It could easily cost a million dollars or more to get into SAP, for example, which everyone hates. There are also canned packages, which tend to be annoying for almost everyone.

There are also smaller canned packages such as SalesForce, that address one area of business (CRM). Salesforce has grown to a place where they can integrate with any database despite their simple beginnings. Many companies put together a smattering of different packages, one for CRM, and other for Project Mgmt, Accting, and so on. There is very little that is integrated. It ends up being very costly vs an integrated system.

<I'll accept Filemaker as a "standalone" solution for some small businesses.  Is Panorama still around?  Is Numbers a joke?  As of now, Helix isn't even a consideration for consumer purchase.>

I wouldn't consider a spreadsheet program anything but a joke in a database context. 

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

<Not without a reasonably complete tutorial and/or manual.>

Respectfully disagree. I also don't think that Helix should write its own manuals. It should be a collaboration.

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

<So you REALLY think that software accessible ONLY by those who have taken computer science at the college level make a "pool" of the size QSA needs to throw their hook and bobber into for a "future"?  Now THAT'S funny!

That isn't what I meant, I was talking about the pulse of the industry. However, this is the case with PHP/mySQL, the software that runs most web sites on the net. Same with javascript/node. Same with every other database except for the very low end, like FileMaker. Helix shouldn't be the only tool someone uses, just one of them for when its the right choice. There should be no need to go "all in". If it is a natural progression from what programmers already understand, and has the hooks to other languages, then you have something to work with.

I don't mind if people want to learn and there is an easy path to a simple system. However, it does need to scale...

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful.  I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

<I am reminded of the admonition to not throw the baby out with the bath water.  No matter how much changes at what pace, the necessity to be able to perceive the difference between wheat and chaff remains.

This is fine. However, you must be able to make that judgement based upon current wants and needs. People often talk to me as if a computer is an appliance, like a refrigerator. It should last 10 years...  It simply isn't the way things work anymore....

Lenny

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Lenny,

Comments interspersed below in bold and "< >".

Regards,

WRB

-- 

On Jan 5, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Lenny Eiger wrote:  (in blue below)

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:10 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote: (in green below)

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Lenny Eiger wrote:

My views are those of someone who is a professional in this business, who needs a professional tool. I also, with integrity, need to be able to convince others that its the right tool for their business as well.

<You state the obvious, and you are entitled to those views.  While a majority on this list may agree with you, could any of you explain to me where NEW PURCHASERS of Helix will come from?  The number of licenses being purchased for 7.0 is likely WAY less than before. What, precisely, is likely to change that dead-end trend?>

I believe there is a substantial market space available for Helix. One just needs to create a modern application and tell people that it exists. Marketing, the kind everyone else does these days.

<I do too.  But a detailed review of our exchange would strongly suggest your idea of a "substantial market space available" would differ significantly from mine.  In my view, the ONLY "market" for relational database applications is individuals. You can't sell many bells and whistles to those who haven't been enticed onto the train.

If QSA is to ignore the "single user" market, from which has come EVERY other option in the past, WHAT is the alternative?  Switch to an annual subscription basis?  The portion of the present "pool" that would do that is too few, and the "pool" far too small and too shallow.  Oh, and count me out.>

I have never believed that Helix was for "people who don't think in code". I think its an entirely unsupportable idea, and that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Like many here, one can make a good beginning. It's a lot of work to make an integrated system (and run a business),. The only good thing that has come from this is that I have made a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level.

<I respectfully disagree.  You're riding a dead horse.  Is it not obvious that the number of people able to make "...a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level" has NEVER been large?  The current pool of NEW "people who don't think in code" don't even know that Helix 7.0 exists.  QSA has no funds with which to create or stock such a pool.>

There used to be a very vibrant Helix community of developers, somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 or so. This is during the time when Odesta was running things, a most incompetent group of people when it came to marketing, working with Apple, working with their developers, etc.

<That's the past, dead and gone.  What is the size of that community today?  20?  50?  Sustainable funding from such is increasingly financial chickenfeed.  The necessary funds to keep Helix "alive" for the next decade are NOT there.>

<Again, you speak as a professional.  There have NEVER been enough "professionals" to support the ongoing efforts necessary to keep Helix functional considering Apple's migration to a single IOS-compatible OSX.  Is Helix available through the Apple Store?

This is a very big story, with many components. There were a lot of developers, and many good ones. IMO, it is Helix's lack of support over the years that created this problem.

<The existing "Helix universe" has been steadily decreasing in size.  QSA can't keep doing what they're doing and expect different results.>

Just how many NEW clients have you found over the last decade that aren't from this list?  THAT'S unsustainable.

Yes, it is unsustainable. I have not been able to sell a new company on database software that was aging, and not keeping up with the times. There were many days that their demise looked imminent. If they had something to compete with this would be a different set of issues.

And BTW, speaking of Swift, Apple made their new language for the very same reasons that I am suggesting that Helix be interoperable. They needed a language that was base on C and  C++ so that coders would use it. Objective C came from very different roots and was much too foreign for people to pick it up. So they changed...

<Irrelevant to any exchange with a typical" Mac owner/operator.>

Unless one is curious about why Apple is where it is in the programming world, and where it is going, what its future possibilities are.

<"Professional curiosity" is mandatory, a "given" for anyone that works as a computer "pro".  Teachers attend "workshops" before each new school year and take "continuing education" courses.  They hate the process because it is largely "much ado about nothing".  They don't feel paid for this time, and derive little tangible from it.  

"We the people", mere users, have little time or incentive for such.  OUR time is already divided between "making a living" and "living.>

The pace of change is increasing exponentially. Self driving cars are already on the road. Almost every single person has a smartphone, complete with access to much of the knowledge of everything in human history. Sure, you can buy things and order a movie ticket, but also have access to Wikipedia, Stack Overflow and all the other resources. I could go on, but we all know these things...

<Once again, I agree; but it would is folly to presume all change is good.  Timeliness is everything.  

The basic formula for success has remained constant:  FInd a need and fill it. 

Generally, I would agree. Of course there are many cases where companies have created needs, but that's a minor point.

It's true. The only way forward for Helix is to get investment to build a new, modern database.

<So what "path forward" to such investment do you see?  I'm sure QSA would be all ears.

I'm sure they are thinking about this, and have probably made all sorts of inquiries already. They get my opinions regularly, whether they like them or not... However, they didn't need me to figure this out..

<Figure WHAT out?

My point here is that QSA has likely already EXHAUSTED every promising revenue source over the last decade.  You don't get money without giving up a "piece of the action".  And such money just moves QSA "down the road".  WHICH ROAD?  TO WHERE?  Presumably sustainable cash flow.

I don't think 7.0, as it presently exists, is marketable.  If you take your laptop and Helix you can do many unique things as a consultant for SERVICES.  But that's a far cry from actually selling Helix.

If QSA were to individually train buyers, Helix would get prohibitively expensive almost immediately.  Workshops?  An effective Manual and sample collections would save a lot of expert time..>

This isn't mere potential. This is playing on the field where you live - you don't try to play soccer with football pads, or vice versa. Given Helix's current strength in that area, it's silly not to learn a little AppleScript.

<WHAT "strength"?  WHAT "area".  If fully utilizing Helix 7.0 still requires users to learn Applescript, that's about as logical as requiring it of Mac purchasers.  Your perspective is one of terminal myopia.

I started out in Helix knowing little about databases. It's been a long time now, and I've learned a great deal. One of the things I learned was not to be afraid of traditional coding. AppleScript can be very useful.

<Again, yours is the experience of one self-motivated to become a "pro".  Applescript isn't something I need for anything.  I'd rather use that time flying, fishing, reading...take your pick.>

There is a huge market for Helix if they want to grab it. Currently, there is FileMaker at the low end, and Access (which is a joke). Higher up, you have the sql engines, and the larger ERP systems. If one wants a custom database built, there are very few options at the lower cost point. It could easily cost a million dollars or more to get into SAP, for example, which everyone hates. There are also canned packages, which tend to be annoying for almost everyone.

There are also smaller canned packages such as SalesForce, that address one area of business (CRM). Salesforce has grown to a place where they can integrate with any database despite their simple beginnings. Many companies put together a smattering of different packages, one for CRM, and other for Project Mgmt, Accting, and so on. There is very little that is integrated. It ends up being very costly vs an integrated system.

<I'll accept Filemaker as a "standalone" solution for some small businesses.  Is Panorama still around?  Is Numbers a joke?  As of now, Helix isn't even a consideration for consumer purchase.>

I wouldn't consider a spreadsheet program anything but a joke in a database context. 

<No "pro" would.  But many small businesses have been able to keep track of inventory and finances with such programs, at least much better than paper and pencil.  That said, the old-fashioned pencil and paper remain the "best AVAILABLE solution" to some challenges.

When I had my printing business, I used Helix for primarily for expense collection and allocation.  I threw away the traditional accounting "Statement of Accounts" and made up my own to track what I thought was important.  I also maintained or repaired the machines and cleaned the toilets.  We're not talking Fortune 500 here.  

My tax person filled out the Federal forms I signed, but ONLY I knew what really went on.  The well run private business does not make a profit.  It just breaks even higher and higher.>

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

<Not without a reasonably complete tutorial and/or manual.>

Respectfully disagree. I also don't think that Helix should write its own manuals. It should be a collaboration.

<A collaboration with whom?  I presume you mean to suggest they supply a technical writer a tons of information to sift through and come with something they would review.  FIne, but that's NOT free; and it's NOT presently an apparent priority.

I'd help (if asked), but I would expect to be paid for my time.  I'm sure the same would be true of Jan Harrington (if available).>

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

<So you REALLY think that software accessible ONLY by those who have taken computer science at the college level make a "pool" of the size QSA needs to throw their hook and bobber into for a "future"?  Now THAT'S funny!

That isn't what I meant, I was talking about the pulse of the industry. However, this is the case with PHP/mySQL, the software that runs most web sites on the net. Same with javascript/node. Same with every other database except for the very low end, like FileMaker. Helix shouldn't be the only tool someone uses, just one of them for when its the right choice. There should be no need to go "all in". If it is a natural progression from what programmers already understand, and has the hooks to other languages, then you have something to work with.

I don't mind if people want to learn and there is an easy path to a simple system. However, it does need to scale...

<If our subject remains potential Helix purchasers of the future (exaggerated eye roll), you've GOT to be kidding!>

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful.  I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

<If one is to worship youth, start with the newborn baby.  Just what, precisely, can be learned from incompetence and inexperience that is worthwhile?  The young may be "where the "cool" is and spend a lot of money, but, for the most part they get their money from a relative that earned it the old fashioned way...through hard work.  

"Talking Kitty" may make it's designer rich (or not), but does nothing of value.  For those who live lives without purpose, there's already pot, beer, puzzles and TV.  Thousands of "gamers" have never earned an honest dollar and may NEVER do so.  The future of Helix isn't these people.>

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

<I don't care how agile and flexible one is, the need to focus and prioritize resources to achieve realistic goals remains absolutely essential.  PERT and CPM charts may be "old fashioned, but those fundamental concepts remain pertinent to design and build anything from a fighter to a building to specification and within budget.  Computerizing has just made it easier, quicker and capable of more detail.>

<I am reminded of the admonition to not throw the baby out with the bath water.  No matter how much changes at what pace, the necessity to be able to perceive the difference between wheat and chaff remains.

This is fine. However, you must be able to make that judgement based upon current wants and needs. People often talk to me as if a computer is an appliance, like a refrigerator. It should last 10 years...  It simply isn't the way things work anymore....

<Again, I respectfully disagree.  The things I buy must meet MY expectations.  My computer IS a tool, like any other.  So long as it (and associated software) perform duties assigned, only "special circumstance" could precipitate replacement.

I don't use a "throwaway" pen.  I use a good one that is a joy to use.  I bought a dozen and six boxes of gel refills.  I don't drive the cheapest set of wheels available.  I expect good looks, good performance, decent economy and pleasure getting from point "A" to point "B".  I maintain it religiously, replace the factory tires with appropriate Michelins, and expect to drive it 200,000 miles.  

Why should my computer or software be any different?  My Intel mini was purchased 11/27/10.  As it's tenth birthday approaches, I'll wait to see if Apple updates the Mini or drops it.  Either way, I'll acquire with the "latest and greatest"machine for my needs at a good price next November; and, yes, I will expect it to serve me for ten years PLUS!

I've just finished reading Philip Sterns' 3:15 am Central post.  What a breath of fresh air.  His suggestions are the most realistic and credible yet offered, so I'm going back in my shell in hopes others will "have a say".>

Lenny

[Elton Darby]

...except for the very low end, like FileMaker. Helix shouldn't be the only tool someone uses, just one of them for when its the right choice. There should be no need to go "all in". If it is a natural progression from what programmers already understand, and has the hooks to other languages, then you have something to work with.

As hard as it is for me to say, Filemaker's current version has its place as a tool for certain projects, IMO.  I learned this recently when I encountered a project that seemed to make the most sense to deploy quickly via Filemaker.  It has worked very well; far better than expected.  Given some of its cool features, I can't see a reason to re-write it in another environment as I initially assumed I would do.  While Helix is my favorite Client/Server RDBMS tool and Qilan/MySQL/MariaDB is my favorite Web_Client/Mobile.app tool, Panorama, Excel and Filemaker are also good tools depending on the project/task.

Elton

-------------------

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 5, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Lenny Eiger <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:10 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Hi Lenny,

Comments interspersed below in bold and "< >".

Regards,

WRB

-- 

On Jan 5, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Lenny Eiger wrote:

My views are those of someone who is a professional in this business, who needs a professional tool. I also, with integrity, need to be able to convince others that its the right tool for their business as well.

<You state the obvious, and you are entitled to those views.  While a majority on this list may agree with you, could any of you explain to me where NEW PURCHASERS of Helix will come from?  The number of licenses being purchased for 7.0 is likely WAY less than before. What, precisely, is likely to change that dead-end trend?>

I believe there is a substantial market space available for Helix. One just needs to create a modern application and tell people that it exists. Marketing, the kind everyone else does these days.

I have never believed that Helix was for "people who don't think in code". I think its an entirely unsupportable idea, and that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Like many here, one can make a good beginning. It's a lot of work to make an integrated system (and run a business),. The only good thing that has come from this is that I have made a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level.

<I respectfully disagree.  You're riding a dead horse.  Is it not obvious that the number of people able to make "...a living helping "people who don't think in code" get their databases to a more professional level" has NEVER been large?  The current pool of NEW "people who don't think in code" don't even know that Helix 7.0 exists.  QSA has no funds with which to create or stock such a pool.>

There used to be a very vibrant Helix community of developers, somewhere in the neighborhood of 350 or so. This is during the time when Odesta was running things, a most incompetent group of people when it came to marketing, working with Apple, working with their developers, etc.

<Again, you speak as a professional.  There have NEVER been enough "professionals" to support the ongoing efforts necessary to keep Helix functional considering Apple's migration to a single IOS-compatible OSX.  Is Helix available through the Apple Store?

This is a very big story, with many components. There were a lot of developers, and many good ones. IMO, it is Helix's lack of support over the years that created this problem.

Just how many NEW clients have you found over the last decade that aren't from this list?  THAT'S unsustainable.

Yes, it is unsustainable. I have not been able to sell a new company on database software that was aging, and not keeping up with the times. There were many days that their demise looked imminent. If they had something to compete with this would be a different set of issues.

And BTW, speaking of Swift, Apple made their new language for the very same reasons that I am suggesting that Helix be interoperable. They needed a language that was base on C and  C++ so that coders would use it. Objective C came from very different roots and was much too foreign for people to pick it up. So they changed...

<Irrelevant to any exchange with a typical" Mac owner/operator.>

Unless one is curious about why Apple is where it is in the programming world, and where it is going, what its future possibilities are.

The pace of change is increasing exponentially. Self driving cars are already on the road. Almost every single person has a smartphone, complete with access to much of the knowledge of everything in human history. Sure, you can buy things and order a movie ticket, but also have access to Wikipedia, Stack Overflow and all the other resources. I could go on, but we all know these things...

<Once again, I agree; but it would is folly to presume all change is good.  Timeliness is everything.  

The basic formula for success has remained constant:  FInd a need and fill it. 

Generally, I would agree. Of course there are many cases where companies have created needs, but that's a minor point.

It's true. The only way forward for Helix is to get investment to build a new, modern database.

<So what "path forward" to such investment do you see?  I'm sure QSA would be all ears.

I'm sure they are thinking about this, and have probably made all sorts of inquiries already. They get my opinions regularly, whether they like them or not... However, they didn't need me to figure this out..

This isn't mere potential. This is playing on the field where you live - you don't try to play soccer with football pads, or vice versa. Given Helix's current strength in that area, it's silly not to learn a little AppleScript.

<WHAT "strength"?  WHAT "area".  If fully utilizing Helix 7.0 still requires users to learn Applescript, that's about as logical as requiring it of Mac purchasers.  Your perspective is one of terminal myopia.

I started out in Helix knowing little about databases. It's been a long time now, and I've learned a great deal. One of the things I learned was not to be afraid of traditional coding. AppleScript can be very useful.

There is a huge market for Helix if they want to grab it. Currently, there is FileMaker at the low end, and Access (which is a joke). Higher up, you have the sql engines, and the larger ERP systems. If one wants a custom database built, there are very few options at the lower cost point. It could easily cost a million dollars or more to get into SAP, for example, which everyone hates. There are also canned packages, which tend to be annoying for almost everyone.

There are also smaller canned packages such as SalesForce, that address one area of business (CRM). Salesforce has grown to a place where they can integrate with any database despite their simple beginnings. Many companies put together a smattering of different packages, one for CRM, and other for Project Mgmt, Accting, and so on. There is very little that is integrated. It ends up being very costly vs an integrated system.

<I'll accept Filemaker as a "standalone" solution for some small businesses.  Is Panorama still around?  Is Numbers a joke?  As of now, Helix isn't even a consideration for consumer purchase.>

I wouldn't consider a spreadsheet program anything but a joke in a database context. 

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

<Not without a reasonably complete tutorial and/or manual.>

Respectfully disagree. I also don't think that Helix should write its own manuals. It should be a collaboration.

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

<So you REALLY think that software accessible ONLY by those who have taken computer science at the college level make a "pool" of the size QSA needs to throw their hook and bobber into for a "future"?  Now THAT'S funny!

That isn't what I meant, I was talking about the pulse of the industry. However, this is the case with PHP/mySQL, the software that runs most web sites on the net. Same with javascript/node. Same with every other database except for the very low end, like FileMaker. Helix shouldn't be the only tool someone uses, just one of them for when its the right choice. There should be no need to go "all in". If it is a natural progression from what programmers already understand, and has the hooks to other languages, then you have something to work with.

I don't mind if people want to learn and there is an easy path to a simple system. However, it does need to scale...

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful.  I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

<I am reminded of the admonition to not throw the baby out with the bath water.  No matter how much changes at what pace, the necessity to be able to perceive the difference between wheat and chaff remains.

This is fine. However, you must be able to make that judgement based upon current wants and needs. People often talk to me as if a computer is an appliance, like a refrigerator. It should last 10 years...  It simply isn't the way things work anymore....

Lenny

[Chuck Hinkle]

Be careful how you define “pro,” then.

I’d say that it’s an embarrassment fact not just where I work (one of the largest companies in the world, depending on the measurement) but throughout even multi-national companies how much critical work is done via Excel. Companies would like to move it to SAP, but the interface and capabilities of SAP are horrendous compared to Excel. And any really useful tool (begin by thinking of Spotfire) support Excel, which only makes it more entrenched. 

And regarding that you may think of your computer as an appliance. I’d just like to know where you can get a refrigerator that will last ten years. Maybe Refrigerators are better, but dishwashers and washing machines seem designed to last three years at the best these days. And they don’t even get anything clean. I want my computer to be a lot better than a contemporary appliance.

Chuck

On Jan 6, 2017, at 4:26 AM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

<snip>

I wouldn't consider a spreadsheet program anything but a joke in a database context. 

<No "pro" would.  But many small businesses have been able to keep track of inventory and finances with such programs, at least much better than paper and pencil.  That said, the old-fashioned pencil and paper remain the "best AVAILABLE solution" to some challenges.

When I had my printing business, I used Helix for primarily for expense collection and allocation.  I threw away the traditional accounting "Statement of Accounts" and made up my own to track what I thought was important.  I also maintained or repaired the machines and cleaned the toilets.  We're not talking Fortune 500 here.  

My tax person filled out the Federal forms I signed, but ONLY I knew what really went on.  The well run private business does not make a profit.  It just breaks even higher and higher.>

Consequently, there is a lot of opportunity in the small to medium size market for a good database. Helix has a lot of advantages. The "Where Used" feature is one that all traditional coders drool over. The icon grouping one can do in View by Icon is very powerful. It indexes on derived values (concatenated keys and other mechanisms). There are plenty of other things it does well, we all have our favorites.

<Not without a reasonably complete tutorial and/or manual.>

Respectfully disagree. I also don't think that Helix should write its own manuals. It should be a collaboration.

<A collaboration with whom?  I presume you mean to suggest they supply a technical writer a tons of information to sift through and come with something they would review.  FIne, but that's NOT free; and it's NOT presently an apparent priority.

I'd help (if asked), but I would expect to be paid for my time.  I'm sure the same would be true of Jan Harrington (if available).>

The much more numerous, less sophisticated computer purchaser has always sought a tool that generates income from time and money invested.  Time spent "learning in perpetuity" such as "...a new language every few months" cannot be sold.

Every computer science student in college knows that this is a part of their industry going forward. Not only can it be sold, it is the state of current reality.

<So you REALLY think that software accessible ONLY by those who have taken computer science at the college level make a "pool" of the size QSA needs to throw their hook and bobber into for a "future"?  Now THAT'S funny!

That isn't what I meant, I was talking about the pulse of the industry. However, this is the case with PHP/mySQL, the software that runs most web sites on the net. Same with javascript/node. Same with every other database except for the very low end, like FileMaker. Helix shouldn't be the only tool someone uses, just one of them for when its the right choice. There should be no need to go "all in". If it is a natural progression from what programmers already understand, and has the hooks to other languages, then you have something to work with.

I don't mind if people want to learn and there is an easy path to a simple system. However, it does need to scale...

<If our subject remains potential Helix purchasers of the future (exaggerated eye roll), you've GOT to be kidding!>

I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me "it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough". He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful.  I argued, of course, but he was right. I'm not going to defend emojis here, but the truth is that we get stuck in our thinking. I've been developing iPhone apps for many years and I could never come up withy the concept of the "Talking Kitty" a silly app that sold millions. My friend was right. I have struggled to think clearly about things, and constantly change. I am doing it more. Attitudes I've had for 40 years are getting tossed, and its opening up new possibilities.

<If one is to worship youth, start with the newborn baby.  Just what, precisely, can be learned from incompetence and inexperience that is worthwhile?  The young may be "where the "cool" is and spend a lot of money, but, for the most part they get their money from a relative that earned it the old fashioned way...through hard work.  

"Talking Kitty" may make it's designer rich (or not), but does nothing of value.  For those who live lives without purpose, there's already pot, beer, puzzles and TV.  Thousands of "gamers" have never earned an honest dollar and may NEVER do so.  The future of Helix isn't these people.>

In today's world, one cannot simply address things like they were addressed in WW II. The world has moved on. Sure, we don't like all of it, there are lots of issues, including serious ones, but the playing field is moved. We have to be agile and flexible or we will get lost int he shuffle...

<I don't care how agile and flexible one is, the need to focus and prioritize resources to achieve realistic goals remains absolutely essential.  PERT and CPM charts may be "old fashioned, but those fundamental concepts remain pertinent to design and build anything from a fighter to a building to specification and within budget.  Computerizing has just made it easier, quicker and capable of more detail.>

<I am reminded of the admonition to not throw the baby out with the bath water.  No matter how much changes at what pace, the necessity to be able to perceive the difference between wheat and chaff remains.

This is fine. However, you must be able to make that judgement based upon current wants and needs. People often talk to me as if a computer is an appliance, like a refrigerator. It should last 10 years...  It simply isn't the way things work anymore....

<Again, I respectfully disagree.  The things I buy must meet MY expectations.  My computer IS a tool, like any other.  So long as it (and associated software) perform duties assigned, only "special circumstance" could precipitate replacement.

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Chuck,

It would seem your argument is more in opposition to Lenny's "joke" comment than my agreeing comment.  I'm a reasonably capable and experienced Helix single-user amateur, and that's it.  I would define a "pro" as anyone engaging in a pursuit on a predominately paid basis.  That's decidedly not what I do with my computer.

Helix, for me, is essential software, together with my word processor (Pages), browser (Firefox), internet provider (Verizon), email program (Apple Mail), music storage (iTunes), photo storage (iPhoto), Image Capture and the usual supporting cast of associated utilities.  I evaluated database offerings and purchased it way back in 1986.  Over the years it has provided me utility and capability far beyond my wildest dreams.  

My experience with appliances differs significantly from yours.  The first refrigerator I purchased was a basic GE from a "scratch and dent" place just before we bought our first house in 1966.  By the time we were ready for delivery, they had either sold it or lost it and so provided a new, undamaged one.  I still own it and it still works fine as a "hangar fridge", although presently stored.  

When I moved my mom to be near us in 1977, the KitchenAid fridge she had was stored and she bought a new one.  Around 2002 we quit using out original GE (after 39 years) and hooked up the stored KitchenAid.  It's still going strong.  

When we move into a new home under construction, we'll install a GE no frost we bought when a friend moved last year and sell 3 unneeded but working fridges.  Originally purchased in 2000, the GE has been running about sixteen so far.   It's definitely been my experience that refrigerators do what they do a long time.

The Hotpoint dishwasher, electric cooktop and double ovens original to our 1966 home were all still functioning fine when we sold it in 1999, each 33 years old and looking new.  Clothes dryers last a long time too, whether gas or electric.  Clothes washers not so much, probably averaging 8 years (repairing when possible).  I understand that today's dishwashers don't work well if one "pre-washes" inserted dishes, pans, etc.

As to computers still functional, there's my original Apple 512Ke (floppy drive inoperable) and its 20mb HD, a IIci, three PPC minis, and two MacBooks (2003 G3 and later G4).  My APCs seem to be bulletproof if one replaces batteries as they expire or cease to hold significant charge. 

Computers I've had fail in service have been my B&W Mac Portable (bought used in 1996 and my primary computer until 2003), a 1999 Bondi Blue CRT iMac (which I never liked and became flakey in 3 years), and my first Mini (after a cat dumped a bowl of water on it, don't ask, which fried the mother board.  

Such service may be helped by the fact that I have a lightning arrestor on my main electrical panel supply (not common practice, but it should be).  Power then flows to my computer and accessories get their power via APC uninterruptible power supply.

Apple aluminum keyboards and Logitech thumb-ball mice have not showed long functional life.  The keyboards start repeating letters and the mice start dropping the cursor when one moves it, and I replace them once a good cleaning ceases to cure the problem.  

 

Best!

WRB

-- 

[Chuck Hinkle]

Hey, William,

I really wasn’t trying to make any kind of an argument one way or the other. I was just inserting a comment about Excel being for more mission-critical than database and application people prefer. Back in the Apple User Group days, I used to go to the Excel user group and when they got trying to explain how VLookup worked, there would be the point when I would recommend that they may have outgrown a spreadsheet and are ready to use a database.

As for appliances, it looks like you’re not using any appliances made in the last 5-10 years, so your experiences are not comparable to what I describe. I also have my story about a Sunbeam toaster that my mom got as a wedding present in 1959. When I graduated college and moved to Houston, I got that toaster and she got a new one. That toaster still runs perfectly (not so all of the toasters she’s had since then). But back then, appliances were built to last. Back in 99, we got to take a cruise to the Panama Canal, and it was still running with all of the original equipment. Goes to show that things can be made to last when you want to. But that hasn’t been my experience with LG or Whirlpool or GE appliances since around 2000.

Chuck

[Publiclee]

The death of corporate loyalty, the death march of “built to last” appliance makers under the guise of “value engineering” all begin with (or is epitomised by) that ass-clown Al “Chainsaw” Dunlap. What he did to Sunbeam is a case study of how not to manage change.

We are all suffering the consequences of men like him being given power without qualification.

Lee

[Matt Strange]

On Jan 9, 2017, at 01:50, Publiclee <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

We are all suffering the consequences of men like him being given power without qualification.

What we are suffering (with built-not-to-last goods) are the consequences of market forces.

When confronted with two devices of apparent similar function, one of which costs X and lasts 2 years, the other costing X+Y and lasting 4 years, the majority of consumers will purchase X because “it costs less."

I worked part-time for Apple in the mid-90s, during their ill-fated attempt to sell Macs in Sears, Staples, et. al., as a local rep to those outlets. I witnessed this first hand, both in talking to customers and to sales people who weren’t paid enough to educate the customer to the simple proposition that if they spent 10% more today, they would save a great deal in the long run. “Yeah, but that one's a hundred dollars more.”

Most of us could talk all day about how SCSI was superior to IDE, etc. but the market tends to gravitate to the low price option, all the while complaining about how “they don’t make things like they used to.” But that’s the way it is and companies must make a profit, or they die.

I won’t sit here and say I am any better — when shopping for a new whatever, I always compare price and often neglect to compare value.

Matt Strange

[William R. Bayne]

A subscription to Consumer Reports is a good approach to a major or recurring purchase.  

They do seem to have an undue bias against small cars.  Back in 1999 they rated my 3-door hatchback poorly, and I found it very close to an ideal vehicle until I totaled it in early June of 2014 at 130,000 miles.  I was heading out of town at 45 mph (and accelerating) after dark and an idiot suddenly pulled out in front of me from a McDonalds.  T-boned her big junker.

Bought a new Mazda 2 hatchback with manual gearbox after considerable research and reading all the driving tests.  Can't say enough good things about the car, but CR once again preferred the larger Mazda 3 and so Mazda no longer imports the smaller vehicle here.  Sigh.

The winds of "market forces" can blow both ways.  It's one thing to design and build a product to meet a "price point".  It's quite another to deliberately design a product to fail prematurely such that premature replacement generates undeserved profit.  I believe the term for this practice is "planned obsolescence".  Every business complicit in such practice richly deserves eventual failure.

Apple has become the quintessential example of "planned obsolescence".  They constantly churn the "systems" they ship with new hardware, many "change for the sake of change" that would not otherwise sell.  They also deliberately design their hardware so it can't run older, perfectly adequate prior "systems" and associated software.  Apple has chosen self-interest over the legitimate interests of their customers and continues to be richly rewarded for doing so.

It's fine to improve a product and then raise the price commensurate with that improvement.  Demand for the product is then the final judge of right and wrong.  Sales driven by anyi-consumer board room decisions aren't.   

Profiting from consumer victimization should be illegal, like buying generic drugs (whose cost of development has long been amortized) and raising the price 5000%. .  America's market place remains very much "let the buyer beware".  Our Donald Trumps AND Elizabeth Warrens are BOTH needed if competing interests are ever to transition into equitable and sustainable balance.

Apple has implemented a development program that intentionally denies consumers technical and parts support sooner than necessary.  To thus interfere with purchaser's productive use of hardware and software prematurely is unethical way beyond disingenuous.  So I defect when I can and buy Dell Ultrasharp monitors and Logitech mice.

Best!

WRB

-- 

[Frank Shyjka]

I have been watching this back and forth for some time and finally am irritated enough to comment.

For a man who takes pride in consistently does not keep up by buying the newest and greatest, for a man who uses his purchases to the end of a reasonable life expectancy, I find accusations of forced obsolescence disingenuous.

I buy most of my hardware used and my software current and find minimum difficulties with updates even on older minis.

I find the discussion about marketing to new users to be the most important to growing Helix. And I think videos showing effective uses will be more effective than a manual. The online help is sufficient.

Thank you for reading my two cents worth.

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Frank,

Each of us has a measure of choice in how we live and use our individual resources.  The great majority, unlike those on this list, are NOT computer "pros" or enthusiasts.  

Apple's forced obsolescence is directly responsible for Matt having to constantly chase his tail keeping Helix compatible with each sequential "system" released increasingly focusing on the integration of desktop Macs with IOS.  The journey of Helix from OS 9 to OSX would have been much shorter and quicker with longer periods between such releases.  All pay the price for "change for the sake of change" (as opposed to genuine improvements).

Computers and software purchased by most consumers (that aren't adolescent "gamers" that produce NOTHING) are viewed as tools that may or may not prove useful to the purpose intended.  This time of year the bulk of annual gym equipment sold winds up being clothes hangers.  Such purchasers ultimately refuse to allocate the time necessary to improve their personal health and/or longevity.  

We are each limited to 24 hours a day in which to "live"...eat, sleep, learn, work and play.  Success or failure in our own eyes and those of others is largely determined by our priorities.  

I value using the tools I purchase more than allocating the unlimited time necessary to keep up with the "newest and greatest", much of which is of little practical use (to me, MY assessment).  I leave vacuuming up any and all change to those who do this for a living, fanboys, and hobbists.  Been there, done that, no more.  As one ages, their decreasing life expectation should make their remaining time ever more precious to them.

When I make a major purchase, I do my homework beforehand.  Afterward, I generally don't "keep up" with that subject until another purchase is necessary.  Only in computing are consumers expected to be lemmings, rushing over the next cliff, or gerbils constantly running in a cage going nowhere.  I simply refuse to devote significant time of MINE to being a "lab rat" for others.

I agree with you that marketing to new users is essential to any Helix future.  Whether videos or a manual are "more efficient" is a legitimate subject for discussion.  Discouraging such discussion is in no one's best interests.

Happy New Year!

WRB

-- 

On Jan 10, 2017, at 8:48 AM, Frank Shyjka wrote:

I have been watching this back and forth for some time and finally am irritated enough to comment.

For a man who takes pride in consistently does not keep up by buying the newest and greatest, for a man who uses his purchases to the end of a reasonable life expectancy, I find accusations of forced obsolescence disingenuous.

I buy most of my hardware used and my software current and find minimum difficulties with updates even on older minis.

I find the discussion about marketing to new users to be the most important to growing Helix. And I think videos showing effective uses will be more effective than a manual. The online help is sufficient.

Thank you for reading my two cents worth.

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:52 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

A subscription to Consumer Reports is a good approach to a major or recurring purchase.  

<snip>

[Steven F Finder]

On Jan 10, 2017, at 12:26 PM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Apple's forced obsolescence is directly responsible for Matt having to constantly chase his tail keeping Helix compatible with each sequential "system" released increasingly focusing on the integration of desktop Macs with IOS.  The journey of Helix from OS 9 to OSX would have been much shorter and quicker with longer periods between such releases.  All pay the price for "change for the sake of change" (as opposed to genuine improvements).

OK, I’ll bite. Give me a couple of examples of the forced obsolescence (change for the sake of change) that Apple if forcing on consumers.

Thanks,

Steven Finder

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Steven,

I'm really not the person to properly make a point that is common knowledge.  My direct experience with Apple's systems presently ends with 10.6.8 which is on the MC270LL/A Intel Mini I purchased on Black Friday in 2006, over 10 years ago.

As I told Chuck, I use Helix to manipulate data, Pages to manipulate words (although will soon try Scrivener for some larger projects), Apple Mail, iTunes for music storage, and iPhoto for pictures (Super Duper for backups).  I get marginal 4G internet service from Verizon and use Image Capture and the usual cast of compatible supporting utilities including Diskwarrior and Drive Genius.  My use and needs did not change with the move from PPC to Intel, but software employed by my bank is endlessly updated with an ever-shortening "backward tail".  

Apple puts customers on notice when they abandon them, i.e. cease to update security and functionality for earlier "systems".  You want those "services" back, a new machine gets you back on the gerbil wheel.  It would be entirely consistent with Apple's current "culture" when Apple ceases to sell parts or repair an older functioning machine, existing spares are destroyed rather than sold to independent repair companies who make a living servicing older Macs.

Ever-increasing incompatibility with bank software and hacking vulnerability caused me to abandoned my trusty G4 with 10.4.11 and increasingly abominable G3 internet in July of 2015.  I guess  the 2006 Intel mini is more secure (although updates fir it have also ceased).  The much later 48.0.2 Firefox is faster but crashes or freezes much more often.  Sigh.

The Intel chip should be much faster, according to specifications. I pay close to $150/mo. for 16GB of data plus two LG "dumb phones".  Geekbench strongly suggests MY "choke point" in speed is my flakey internet connection.  I suspect my Mini is likely taking multiple "handshakes" to download a web site, etc. because I don't download movies or visit Utube more than occasionally and my Airport connection is constantly "looking for networks" out here in rural Texas. 

Bottom line is that I have gained little, if anything in the last decade (plus) in computer functionality.  I back up my stuff both locally and remotely on HDs and/or Flash Drives.  Don't use the cloud, don't use Time Machine.  I have never purchased anything from the Apple Store, and have had concerns that at some point iTunes would be modified to not store or play music not purchased through Apple.  

I have no NEED for any of the "improvements" Apple has put forth to do what I do.  Accordingly, to me, virtually all of this qualifies as "forced obsolescence" since, over time, I must upgrade my hardware and software just to keep doing what I need to do.  Older machines increasingly lose their ability to timely and reliably communicate with my bank's ever-upgrading software to pay bills and transfer funds as needed.

Earlier in this thread, Lenny said:  "I was complaining about Apple spending all their time on emojis vs giving us a good computer a couple of weeks back and a colleague told me 'it's just because you are too old and can't think young enough'.  He said I should note that Apple created a new language that did not require an alphabet and it would be interesting to see if it ever got useful."  

I know Apple has sufficient resources to run down every possible blind alley TWICE in search of things that may someday be "useful" (have monetary or intellectual value).  Such nonsense is likely the source of much of the "chaff" that clutters up their sequential systems.  

When all is said and done, my perspective and computer use are no less legitimate than yours.  Just totally different.

Best!

WRB

-- 

[tim]

I can't open 20 years worth of appleworks files.

TDB

[Elton Darby]

I can't open 20 years worth of appleworks files.

I had that issue with very old Word files as well as a few AW; found a old PPC MPB that ran 10.4x, AW and a older version of Word, wrote a AS to convert all -- IIRC, was not hard (and I know nil about AS).

Elton

-------------------

Sent from my iPhone

[Wade Brezina]

[Originator's address is wint...@mnmicro.net]

Try using Libre Office. Not sure about the current version but one or two versions back would open appleworks files and those versions are available for download. I quit using Excel a few years ago and have found Libre Office to be a worthy replacement.

Wade

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:55 AM, tim <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:
>
> I can't open 20 years worth of appleworks files.
> TDB
>

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is wint...@mnmicro.net]

[Steven F Finder]

[Originator's address is sfi...@me.com]

Just a few comments. See below.

> On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:10 AM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Steven,
>
> I'm really not the person to properly make a point that is common knowledge.

I am not sure that this is common knowledge.

> My direct experience with Apple's systems presently ends with 10.6.8 which is on the MC270LL/A Intel Mini I purchased on Black Friday in 2006, over 10 years ago.

That machine will continue to work for you and you can still get parts for it. I have an old Mac from 1984 (one of the originals). Assuming it starts up, I am sure I can still use it.

> Ever-increasing incompatibility with bank software and hacking vulnerability caused me to abandoned my trusty G4 with 10.4.11 and increasingly abominable G3 internet in July of 2015.

Why do you care about being compatible with bank software?

> I have no NEED for any of the "improvements" Apple has put forth to do what I do. Accordingly, to me, virtually all of this qualifies as "forced obsolescence" since, over time, I must upgrade my hardware and software just to keep doing what I need to do.

My whole point is that you don’t have to upgrade your hardware and software. If you didn’t have a NEED, why did you upgrade? You can stay where you were.

> When all is said and done, my perspective and computer use are no less legitimate than yours. Just totally different.

Actually your perspective is not really legitimate. That sounds harsh but its true. Hear me through. Apple is a business and it survives by selling product that people want to buy. It does that by innovating and the process of innovating makes older technology less appealing and less productive as the ecosystem in which computer technology functions is also innovating. So you buy a computer in 2001 that works well with bank software. But over the last 15 years or so bank software and technology have evolved. If you want to stay current with your bank you have to upgrade. Do you have to upgrade to bank, no. Use a bank that will still provide paper records.

The problem I have with your comments is that the entire ecosystem is evolving. The decisions that create this evolution are small individual decisions made by thousands of people (on the supply side) and millions of people (on the demand side). No one is really guiding this. Large companies like Apple have to evolve with the ecosystem or lose relevance. In some cases, they try to get out front of this evolution in order to maintain a competitive advantage. But no one is purposely trying to force someone to keep up with the evolution. These thousands of decisions are just reasonable decisions being made by individuals trying to do the best that they can. This is capitalism as its best.

You don’t want to participate. That’s fine. But since almost everyone else does, you are in a very small minority position. Because it is so small, it carries no weight. I wish it was different but life is never fair.

Take care,

Steven Finder

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You received this message because you are subscribed to the mailing
list <Hel...@realpeople.com>.
To unsubscribe, e-mail <Helix...@realpeople.com>; to switch to
DIGEST mode, e-mail <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>; contact a
human being at <Helix-L...@realpeople.com>. Google archive
since 20 August 2006: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/helix-l.
Basic archive since 1 Jan 2006:
http://mail.realpeople.com:8100/Lists/Helix-L/List.html

[Originator's address is sfi...@me.com]

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Steven,

Response below in "< >" and bold.

Best!

WRB

On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:06 PM, Steven F Finder wrote:

[Originator's address is sfi...@me.com]

Just a few comments. See below.

On Jan 11, 2017, at 12:10 AM, William R. Bayne <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

Hi Steven,

I'm really not the person to properly make a point that is common knowledge.

I am not sure that this is common knowledge.

<It is what it is.  To some who have posted, it is the difficulty of accessing once-current work still pertinent if even as archives on Macs, i.e. MacWrite, WriteNow, and early Word files.  Not impossible, but harder than it should be.>

My direct experience with Apple's systems presently ends with 10.6.8 which is on the MC270LL/A Intel Mini I purchased on Black Friday in 2006, over 10 years ago.

That machine will continue to work for you and you can still get parts for it. I have an old Mac from 1984 (one of the originals). Assuming it starts up, I am sure I can still use it.

<I think the key word here is USEFUL use.  That old Mac might read MacWrite, but not MacWrite II and maybe not WriteNow.

Ever-increasing incompatibility with bank software and hacking vulnerability caused me to abandoned my trusty G4 with 10.4.11 and increasingly abominable G3 internet in July of 2015.

Why do you care about being compatible with bank software?

<I recognized and embraced the merit of Web Billpay rather early on.  Left one bank because they had no schedule to implement same.  This is a third party service most banks today offer which allows one to schedule payment of bills from one (or more) account(s) at one's convenience.  I do so usually on the 19th and 26th of each month.  

This is better than authorizing ongoing specific ongoing monthly payments because each transaction is "one-time".  In the case of one life insurance policy I wished to drop, they continued to suck payments from my credit card account.  The credit card bank's position was that they could not withhold payment and I had to resolve the situation from my end.  

I told the bank to shut that card number down and open it with different "last 4" numbers...pain in the a**.  Been there, not gonna go again.>

I have no NEED for any of the "improvements" Apple has put forth to do what I do.  Accordingly, to me, virtually all of this qualifies as "forced obsolescence" since, over time, I must upgrade my hardware and software just to keep doing what I need to do.

My whole point is that you don’t have to upgrade your hardware and software. If you didn’t have a NEED, why did you upgrade? You can stay where you were.

<No, I was having increasing problems transferring funds between accounts online without paying fees to use my own money.  Banks IT departments software is constantly being upgraded to be compatible with the "latest and greatest" from Apple, etc.  Arbitrary decisions are concurrently made as to how far back computer compatibility will be maintained.  If I stay where I am, they steadily move away and problems WILL occur.>

When all is said and done, my perspective and computer use are no less legitimate than yours.  Just totally different.

Actually your perspective is not really legitimate. That sounds harsh but its true. Hear me through. Apple is a business and it survives by selling product that people want to buy. It does that by innovating and the process of innovating makes older technology less appealing and less productive as the ecosystem in which computer technology functions is also innovating.

<If survival was the goal, Apple could do a lot more with their assets in terms of maintaining backward compatibility and support.  It isn't, and maximum profits their goal.  That works only so long as people don't rebel.  I may be only one, but I reject their current culture and most of their products.  Next time they upgrade the Mini design, I'll get a new one (as the least worst option to stay connected for another decade plus).>

So you buy a computer in 2001 that works well with bank software. But over the last 15 years or so bank software and technology have evolved. If you want to stay current with your bank you have to upgrade. Do you have to upgrade to bank, no. Use a bank that will still provide paper records.

<As I said, I use Web Billpay.  It saves me time and stamps, and has proven more reliable as a method of timely payment than snail mail.  Most banks today charge you for paper records.  I still maintain an old fashioned check register in which I list each payment, whether by check or Web Billpay, as well as each deposit.  (Should probably set this up in Helix)  I never have to ask my bank(s) what my balance is...just check online several times a month to make sure my math and theirs agree.>

The problem I have with your comments is that the entire ecosystem is evolving. The decisions that create this evolution are small individual decisions made by thousands of people (on the supply side) and millions of people (on the demand side). No one is really guiding this.

<Agree completely.>

Large companies like Apple have to evolve with the ecosystem or lose relevance. In some cases, they try to get out front of this evolution in order to maintain a competitive advantage. But no one is purposely trying to force someone to keep up with the evolution. These thousands of decisions are just reasonable decisions being made by individuals trying to do the best that they can.

<I disagree.  When Apple deliberately designs its computers and software such that you can't install an older system on YOUR computer, they FORCE evolution.  How far do you think the "evolution" process Darwin observed would have gotten if every step forward concurrently poisoned MOST preceding generations?>

 This is capitalism as its best.

<No.  Capitalism at its best is when a genuine need is met such that consumer steps forward with their money in free exchange for that product.  Inappropriate coercion should NEVER be part of any purchasing decision excepting the necessity to balance "needs" inherently in conflict.  One example would be the desire of an individual to drive without the expense of insurance versus society's obligation to bundle the privilege to use roads with the unavoidable responsibly/ability to compensate others we damage or injure in such process.>

You don’t want to participate. That’s fine. But since almost everyone else does, you are in a very small  minority position.

<I fundamentally oppose unnecessary coercion to the extent possible whenever and wherever as a matter of principle.  The meek, adverse to the slightest unpleasantness, are always so plentiful as to make life increasingly difficult for the rest of us.  

Today, in order to open a bank account or own and use a cell phone, we each must agree in advance in writing to an arbitration process that will deny us our constitutional access to a jury of our peers in matters of dispute.  Long ago usury was outlawed as being contrary to the interests of civil society.  Today, with 18+% interest on credit card (and other) debt and 400% payday lenders it would appear those who lobby for these industries have taken society backward with little, if any protest.

As a parent, do you accept the logic from a child that "Everyone else is doing (whatever)"?  Those who do are to be pitied.  At some point in life everyone learns the word "NO".  It's a kinder, gentler process when the lesson is learned from someone who loves them instead of a society that could not care less.

When some process fails and I have a discussion, I am frequently told:  "You'll have to ...".  As appropriate, I inform them:  "At seventy-six years of age there are damned few things in life I still HAVE to do, and THAT isn't one of them!">

Because it is so small, it carries no weight. I wish it was different but life is never fair.

<Nobody ever promised fair.  That doesn't mean we all shouldn't value fairness highly and promote it whenever and wherever possible for the common good.>

Take care,

Steven Finder

[david weller]

I had the same issue, But I found ways to open each and every one of them (that I really wanted to move forward.) The rest went in the trash where I should have put them when I stopped referring to them. 

I also saved a mac or 2 from clear back to a Mac se30 and even some apple ][’s.  

 (still kick myself for not keeping at least ONE apple /// - stupid)   So if I find a file I REALLY need to open I can, at the very least, go back to one of my old machines and look at it or edit it. 

Some of the work needed redone anyhow as my tastes changed, and I found it satisfying to redo something that had taken FOREVER on old hardware and software and do it on modern equipment. 

Good grief guys, the world moves on, my old se30 is NOT obsolete, I can still use it if I want.  BUT WHY??  It has a tiny screen, black and white, can’t connect to the internet, is slower than a PC Jr. running in molasses and it’s just not fun anymore.  Cool to fire it up and see how the world used to be, but not worth a damn for actual productivity.  Remember not having a hard drive and swapping 5.25” floppies for everything?  I had a backup of my accounting program that ran into dozens of 5.25” floppies or a pile of 3.5” ones.  Then I found Zip drives. A wonderful, yet terrible, thing.  I recall the “click of death” on those drives clearly.  I DON’T want that technology back, it sucked!  BUt apple built them into a few desktops back in the Beige days. They didn’t do it because they knew the Zip would die soon, they did it because people like me clamored for more removable storage.  I understand the pain of learning new things and feel like you are being “forced” to change.  But in the long run, I see it as an upside, not a downside.        

Before Helix when I did a parts search of a few thousand records in appleworks (yep, we had our data in appleworks for a couple years) it took nearly a minute to return a match.  That technology deserved to die. Helix, and the hardware it runs on, have made my business run smoothly and made my life much easier.   I’m not going back to the old ways unless it’s for a trip down memory lane. Nostalgia is fine, but it won’t run the world. 

Dave Weller      

“You’ve done a good job, Master Dil, she said, but I’m going to drag this country kicking and screaming into the Century of the Fruitbat.”
“Cobra,” said Gern.
“What?”
“It’s the Century of the Cobra. Not the Fruitbat.”

“Whatever,” said Dil irritably. He stared miserably into his mug. That was the trouble now, he reflected. You had to start remembering what century it was.

Excerpt From: Pratchett, Terry. “Pyramids.” 

 

On Jan 11, 2017, at 8:55 AM, tim <Hel...@realpeople.com> wrote:

I can't open 20 years worth of appleworks files.

TDB

[William R. Bayne]

Hi Dave,

Love USEFUL technology, like (dumb) cell phones, Firewire drives, Flash drives, USB interface, Airport wireless keyboards, B&W laser printers, wireless printing, and a computer with good software like Helix, a decent word processor, something for storing/organizing music and pictures, paying bills, appropriate utilities and support applications.  

Once I have decent capability, I get grumpy having to buy new versions or machines to retain it.  No, I don't miss floppies, Superdisks, Zip Drives or CD (only) drives.  Firewire, USB and the Superdrive for CDs and DVDs has served me well, but "state of the art" stuff now uses USB III and Thunderbolt.  Too much like running on the hamster wheel, getting nowhere; but I do what I have to do even as I bitch about it.    

Still ample room for improvement.  Inexpensive high speed high capacity internet, Apple TV, BlueRay, anyone?  

Loved the Terry Prachett quote.  Read my forever favorite short story:  "THEY"RE MADE OUT OF MEAT", by Terry Bisson

http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html

Best!

WRB

-- 

[Ron Jenkins]

Just to nitpick :-) I don't think that's accurate. The SE/30 was quite an advanced machine for it's time. It was the GUI that made things seem slow.

I had a couple of personal programs that would produce results faster on a C64 then on a 'Fat Mac', provided the Mac was going through the GUI to display the results.

Ron

[david weller]

I’ll admit to a bit of hyperbole there.  :-)