> 	I think it is a simple cost thing. They are probably not willing
> to give us copies of the source code, so it will cost them to present
> this low-level information is such a way as we can use it.

I think it's cost, but it's also time, effort, and the fact that they've
got some of the same technology in the PowerMacs that they've got in the
older Macs.

The documentation that they do have is internal documentation--it's
probably got gobs of information that they may still not want to let
out (because of bugs, typos, incorrect info, etc.), and they certainly
don't want to get into a position of supporting developers for all of
the wide variety of machines that they were building toward the end of
the 68k Macintosh's hey-day.

> 	There was a business case here. A list of people said that they
> would buy PowerMacs if Linux was available to run on it. Future sales offset
> the cost involved in helping the Linux developers.

Note that they're still not giving out docs--just source code to an OS
that they are not selling.

> 	There is no business case in helping Unix ports to old machines.
> It won't generate new hardware or software sales (though it would increase
> goodwill!)

Definitely.  On both counts.

-allen

-- 
              Allen Briggs - end killing - briggs@macbsd.com