HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: IBM Funny
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 01:17:03 GMT

In article <6057.2ac6dd05@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
> In article <1992Sep27.122135.22721@NeoSoft.com>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> > The Windows GUI is significantly better designed than Apple's, 

> <GACK!>

> You must be using some unusual, non-standard definition of the word "better".

Um, easier to learn and use. More powerful. More convenient. Less surprising.
More easily generalizable. Better feedback.

> QUICK! What's the keyboard shortcut for copy and past?

I don't have it in front of me (haven't used it in years), but that's in the
Edit menu. Paste will be ALT<EP>, and either cut or copy will be ALT<EC>. The
other will be ALT<EU> or ALT<EO> respectively. The keyboard shortcuts are
uniformally mnemonic for the menu selections. *and* they're displayed on the
screen.

Quick, on the Mac, what's the keyboard shortcut for "Print Draft"?

On the Mac, how do you tell just looking at the screen what programs you have
running?

On the Mac, how do you get proportional scrollbars?

On the Mac, can you move the menu bar down to where you're working on a large
screen?

Sure, the implementation of much of this sucks. PIF files, blech. But the GUI
itself is VERY nice.

> I can't see how you can say it is better, if the interface is this bad.
> Perhaps you meant the programming interface.

That's what I said. Of course, the Mac program interface is pretty icky too.

> > The Windows GUI is about the only Microsoft designed software that's
> > worth using. 

> Using Windows is certainly TONS better than using DOS. I'll admit.

DOS isn't Microsoft's only other product. I'm counting their languages, their
word processor, their spreadsheet, their newer operating system, and the
awful things they did to Xenix.

> applications market is dominated by MS products? Go figure.
> 

Hey, you want to stop that *quit buying Microsoft products*. You sound like
those "term limits" people. "Stop me before I vote for an incumbent again".

> The problem is, Xerox has never acted to defend any of this intellectual
> property.

Xerox never believed they had a salable product. Software wasn't Xerox'
main product line, like it is Apple's.

In any case, the two suits cover basically the same ground. Xerox invented
most of the items Apple claimed rights to.

> At the time when Jobs came around, Xerox management was probably glad to have
> washed their hands of the whole PARC issue. 

I don't think so. They sold the Xerox Star office system for quite a few years,
and it was also significantly better than the Mac.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Segodnja volka obnimal?"
  'U`  
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@lib106.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh emulation on Amiga
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:36:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct01.012900.5186@NeoSoft.com>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
|> In article <ibhan.717796628@husc8> ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:
|> > RE: What the Amiga can't do with a Mac Emulator that a IIci can.
|> > A good percentage of the software coming out for the Mac today is color
|> > based, which means that your Amiga couldn't run it.
|> 
|> What, you *can't* run color software on a B&W Mac? I thought Mac had
|> this device independence stuff down pat!

You were mistaken. 68020, 030 and so on Macs do, but 68000 based macs
do not. They only support a few color commands (and not the right ones,
imho.).
-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: When is a CLI faster than a GUI?
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:58:44 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.172931.5270@usl.edu>, das9674@usl.edu (Stephenson Daniel A) writes:
[deletia]

|> On my PC, 'move *.mod' moves all the soud modules up a level.  FAST.
|> 
|> How easy is it to move dozens of files this way via GUI/mouse?

I do not think that will do it. I think you mean:

move *.mod ..

Which is part of the problem with CLIs; its very easy to make
a mistake like that.

Doing this with a GUI, well, depends. The general case, that
will always do exactly that, is a pain. (you select all,
find, click the more-option button, select search by kind,
type in "sound" in the text-entry box, select "search all  selected
items" and push teh find button. Then drag them to the appropraite
folder. Rather nasty)

However, If you are doing it on MY hard drive, you can select-all
and then drag the sounds to the next folder above, which is
very quick. However this assumes the folder in question as nothing
but sounds. There are other possibiliteies too; perhaps only
one or two files are not sounds. Then u can select all, then
unselect those files, etc... You might also be able to do this
by lassoing all teh sounds, and dragging them.

It all depends on what files are there, and how they are arranged.
It is potentially a pain.

|> --
|> *Dan Stephenson   das9674@usl.edu  
|> *
|> * "To conquer death, you only have to die,..."                   
|> *                             -Jesus , from _Jesus Christ Superstar_

C00l movie! :)

-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
From: dmanning@cwis.unomaha.edu (David Manning)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac software on a NeXT (was: "official" FSF position on apple)
Keywords: ARDI, executor, emulator, NeXT
Date: 26 Sep 92 16:11:42 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha

sienko@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Tanya Sienko) writes:

>Also, while it is running as an emulator, it is FAST!  This is mostly because
>of the NeXTs own speed, plus it has a compatible microprocessor.  Fom what I
>hear, a NeXTstation Turbo runs the mac software from 6 to 20 times faster than
>a mac II ci, depending on the application.

How? If we assume that in raw horsepower alone that a 33 MHz 040 is roughly
five to six times as fast as a 25 MHz 030, how can a *software emulator*   
equal, let alone increase fourfold, the relative speed of that same application
on a Quadra? 

Just because both machines contain a Motorola 68040 does not guarantee any
sort of compatibility -- if it did, maybe the Amiga wouldn't be off in left 
field and Hewlett-Packard would be directing their 680x0 line of workstations
at the Mac market. And Sun would have never needed the SPARC! :-)

This *sounds* like NeXTWorld hype. Anyone have anything more concrete?

Dave

--
[ Dave Manning * Part-Time Instructor * dmanning@cwis.unomaha.edu * Testing...]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: derek@cgrg.ohio-state.edu (Dariusz Bolski)
Subject: Re: CLI vs. GUI RIDICULOUSNESS!!!!Read/New/Followup
Organization: OSU Advanced Computing Center for the Arts and Design
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 05:13:55 GMT

In article <1992Oct01.115645.11749@NeoSoft.com> peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <6083.2ac8922a@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>> Are there any OTHER qualities which would make a CLI preferable to a
>> graphic user interface?
>
>You mean apart from all the cool one-liners that people keep coming up with?
>
>find /usr/spool/news -name '[0-9]*' -type 'f' -print |
>	xargs grep -l -e 'Subject:.*CLI' -e '#!/bin/sh' | pr |
>	mail 'bcoleman@hayes.com'

Ha ha! We will soon hear from Bill (a scream) if someone tests for errors in your
perfect example :-)

>Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.

Regards,

Dariusz Bolski :-)

-- 
Dariusz Bolski     Ohio Supercomputer Center, IBM POWER Visualization System
Systems Programmer Ohio State University , Columbus U.S.
                   The Advanced Computing Center For The Arts And Design
e-mail: derek@cgrg.ohio-state.edu  derek@osc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: derek@cgrg.ohio-state.edu (Dariusz Bolski)
Subject: Re: Macintosh emulation on Amiga
Organization: OSU Advanced Computing Center for the Arts and Design
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 04:45:24 GMT

In article <BvBILy.6os@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> faheyr@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Bob Fahey) writes:
>
>>In article <Bv786v.9q5@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jmo50888@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu 
>>(Josephine M. Otter) writes:
>Over on comp.sys.amiga.*, a lot of talk has been going on about software
>and hardware emulations over the past 6 months or so. Yes, you can emulate
>just about anything you want, given that you can fool your emulated system
>into thinking that your host system is compatible. But, my question is:
>Why? Why spend $500 to get 90% compatiblility with a system if you can just
>spend $700 for a nice used system that you are trying to emulate? 

Assuming I have Amiga 4000, paying additional $300 for Apple Quadra
compatibility (assuming Emplant) is much less than buying Quadra.
This is a reason good enough.

For much less than original Quadra, you would have Amiga A4000 and the
Mac which runs like Quadra (just fewer colors). Thus you would have
two computers. Is it good reason for you?

>Believe
>me, not all of the people who are running emulators are penny-pinchers.

No. They just know what is the value of the money.

>Emulating another computer is more of a status symbol than a necessity.

I have never seen that kind of attitude. I have used PC emulator for years,
for professional programming, I used to own PC computers too. After I discovered
that emulator does all I need (and more) but final testing (which by reason I
did on a real PC) I got rid of PCs and sticked to an emulator.
I still have the need to run it occasionally (like today to run MS-Word to format
someone text in MS-Word format). Funny enough, free demo version of software 
PC-emulator ( on Amiga) works good for such tasks.

>The only time I could see it being cost-effective is when we can get a
>NeXT emulator running on a Mac, Amiga, or whatever, for a few hundred
>dollars. 

Software PC emulators on Amiga are really inexpensive. In the range from $30 to $80.
Mac hardware emulators start from $250 (around). Is it less than buying a Quadra
in addition to Amiga?

>Don't get me wrong, however. I have my share of emulators, but I use them
>only when I don't have access to the real thing.  I think that is the whole
>point of emulating. 

In one of other posts of mine I wrote what could be other merits of emulation.

> How many Mac owners do intensive work on SoftPC?

Some I know of do :-)

>I'm sure there are some, but do you emulate because you want to, or because
>you HAVE to for lack of the real thing?

As of my knowledge they have to because of a lack...

>-Bob

Regards,

Dariusz Bolski

-- 
Dariusz Bolski     Ohio Supercomputer Center, IBM POWER Visualization System
Systems Programmer Ohio State University , Columbus U.S.
                   The Advanced Computing Center For The Arts And Design
e-mail: derek@cgrg.ohio-state.edu  derek@osc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: the NeXT option (Was Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT)
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 16:27:54 GMT

Ishir Bhan writes
> I'm a college student about to buy a computer, and I'd love
> to buy a NeXT, but frankly, I think they're just too expensive.
> Sure, they may be a better deal than the approx $3000 Mac I'm
> about to get, but with Macs you can get color with a machine as
> low-end as the LC.  With the NeXT, you have to find the money
> for a NeXT Station Color, which may be a really nice system, but
> it's also really expensive.  At least on the Mac, you don't need
> to buy a Quadra to have color.

Yes, if you absolutely need color, then the NeXT is expensive.  Its  
good color, but its not cheap.

But look carefully at how you work: how much do you really use color?   
I suspect that grayscale would more than fill most people's needs  
most of the time.  Is having color worth having a less powerful  
machine that doesn't multi-task?  In some applications, it definitely  
is.  In most, i suspect it is not.  For barely over the $3000 you say  
you're about to spend on a mac you would have a much more powerful  
system in every way except for the lack of color.  

Yes, those gifs you get off the net won't be quite as colorful, but  
would your productivity really be affected?

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: When is a CLI faster than a GUI?
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 00:47:02 GMT

Peter> == Peter da Silva <peter@NeoSoft.com> 

 Peter> Quick... what's the name of the program you use to convert a Mac
 Peter> file for transmission via email? BINHEX? That's a cryptic
 Peter> command. You remembered it because it's useful to you.

No, it's "Attach Document", right here on my Message menu in Eudora.
And I remembered it because I looked on the menu.

Or if I'm using ftp, it's Fetch, because that will automatically BinHex
files as I upload them, if I so choose (and if I choose not to choose,
it'll ask me what format I want to use as I upload each one).

Binhex?  I never use "Binhex" to binhex anything... ;)
--
Christopher Davis   | ]CALL -151       
<ckd@eff.org>       | *300: 20 DD FB 60
System Administrator| *3D0G            
EFF +1 617 864 0665 | ]CALL 768        
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: basiji@stein.u.washington.edu (David Basiji)
Subject: Re: 24 hours of advocacy...
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 01:14:15 GMT

C558172@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:
>What has interested me in my reading of .advocacy groups is who considers
>whom to be enemies. Based on my reading of the groups...

>group      hated enemy     lesser enemies    beneath notice?

>amiga      Macs            PC, Atari Falcon  NeXT, Atari ST
>Mac        PC (esp. Windows) DOS             Amiga, Atari
>PC DOS     Mac             Windows, OS/2     everybody else
>PC Windows OS/2                              Mac, Amiga, etc.
>PC OS/2    Windows                           Mac, Amiga, etc.

I prefer:

group____hated enemy___lesser enemy___beneath notice___beyond reproach
 Mac       Windows         DOS         Amiga, Atari        NeXT 



 Dave "what the hell, it's an advocacy group" Basiji

 ;o)
From: jfw@jfwhome.FUNHOUSE.COM (John F. Woods)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac software on a NeXT (was: "official" FSF position on apple)
Keywords: ARDI, executor, emulator, NeXT
Date: 27 Sep 92 17:27:55 GMT
Organization: Misanthropes-R-Us

In <dmanning.717523902@cwis> dmanning@cwis.unomaha.edu (David Manning) writes:
>sienko@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Tanya Sienko) writes:
>>Also, while it is running as an emulator, it is FAST!  This is mostly because
>>of the NeXTs own speed, plus it has a compatible microprocessor.  Fom what I
>>hear, a NeXTstation Turbo runs the mac software from 6 to 20 times faster than
>>a mac II ci, depending on the application.
>How? If we assume that in raw horsepower alone that a 33 MHz 040 is roughly
>five to six times as fast as a 25 MHz 030, how can a *software emulator*   
>equal, let alone increase fourfold, the relative speed of that same application
>on a Quadra? 

First, it does not need to emulate instructions, it only needs to emulate
system traps; it therefore runs the application code at full speed (or faster,
if the CPU is faster).  Second, if the NeXT has custom graphics hardware, it
may be able to emulate the QuickDraw calls faster than the Mac does them,
since most Macs do not have such custom graphics hardware (this may or may not
be the reason, I am only speculating.).
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: flui@fraser.sfu.ca (Francis Wai Gee Lui)
Subject: Re: Macintosh emulation on Amiga
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 03:51:56 GMT

In article <ibhan.718038931@husc8> ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:
>peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>>In article <ibhan.717796628@husc8> ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:
>>> RE: What the Amiga can't do with a Mac Emulator that a IIci can.
>>> A good percentage of the software coming out for the Mac today is color
>>> based, which means that your Amiga couldn't run it.
>
>>What, you *can't* run color software on a B&W Mac? I thought Mac had
>>this device independence stuff down pat!
>
>Well, even if it could run it, it wouldn't make a difference.  I'm
>surprised at you.  This should be pretty obvious to anyone who's used a
>computer.  It doesn't matter what platform you are using: if you don't
>have a color monitor, you're not going to be able to work very well with
>color.  (I know you can argue that you don't need to actually see your
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>work in color, but let's be realistic here).
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I wholeheartedly agree.  Funny how my old high school Art teacher used to use
the same argument whenever I mentioned the Mac's lack of colour--this was
before the Mac II was introduced.  He always used to retort with "Well, if
your output is going to be black and white, then you don't need colour.  Even
if your work is in colour, you can still pick colours from the menu."  Then,
just a couple years ago, he bought a Mac IIsi.

  __   __
 / /\ /_/\__   Francis Lui
/_/ /\\ \ \/\  e-mail: flui@sfu.ca
\ \  / \ \  /
 \ \ \  \_\/   You know you're a techno-dweeb when
  \_\/         floppy drive applies more to your love life,
               and hard drive to your machines.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: Mac Vs. NeXT
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:49:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.145543.981@yvax.byu.edu> sean@digaudio.byu.edu writes:
>In article <basiji.717089019@milton>  writes:
>>Edu prices for a NeXTstation Turbo 8/250/greyscale 17" is circa $3300
>>for our school and we don't even have the best edu deal from NeXT.
>>To do development, you need to add $1000 for more HD/memory but all the
>>development software tools will be included for free.
>
>
>I might add that if you have friends at the school, or a NeXT Campus  
>Consultant, you can add the development system on for free.  It's about 40  
>megs of stuff, so you'll need to make room, but you don't need any more  
>memory to run it.  What takes up the room beyond the 40 megs is on-line  
>docs.

Actually, if you are going to be doing development, you should get
more memory.  During a typical hacking run I have ProjectBuilder,
InterfaceBuilder, Edit (with many open windows), Librarian,
HeaderViewer, and Emacs all running at the same time (not to mention
the omnipresent Mail, Preferences, KperfMon, and Wormhole).  All of
this adds up to a lot of memory and I swap quite a bit (32 meg NSC),
but the killer usually comes at compile time (the compiler uses a lot
of memory along with Librarian) unless you compile on another machine
(that's what I do...).

Memory is cheap, your time isn't.

>NeXT gives its customers full rights to all NeXTSTEP software, including  
>the development tools.  What actually comes with your machine is entirely  
>dependent on the size of your hard drive (i.e., how much stuff NeXT could  
>put onto it).

This is true for NeXT computers but not with NeXTSTEP 486...



andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com     | "We shall not cease from exploration
Andrew Loewenstern      |  And the end of our exploring
Cube Technologies, Inc. |  Will be to arrive where we started
                        |  And know the place for the first time." -T.S. Eliot
From: tomster@wpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Macs are better (and the others aren't)
Date: 4 Oct 92 19:34:42
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
	<1992Oct2.045258.27262@tamsun.tamu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: sfuller@tamsun.tamu.edu's message of Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:52:58 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.045258.27262@tamsun.tamu.edu> sfuller@tamsun.tamu.edu (Steven Eric Fuller) writes:

   In article <strobl.717758712@gmd.de> strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
   >In <6065.2ac71b5b@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
   >>In article <strobl.717624432@gmd.de>, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
   >>Please don't repeat it. The Mac has been open in every respect from the
   >>hardware to the software since 1987. 
   >
   >I'll believe that when I can run a shrinkwrapped copy of the Macintosh
   >OS I bought in the small computer shop around the corner for 90$,
   >on the hardware of *my* choice.
   Name *ONE* OS that you can buy that is completely hardware independant.

Well, I can name *three* os's for which I can buy the hardware from literally
*thousands* of vendors around the world ...  Hell, and that's without even
thinking about it for long ... How many work-station os's are there which
run on more than one company's product?

   >real point is: using that programming interface (and user interface)
   >forces me to buy the OS from Microsoft, but it doesn't force me
   >(and the users of my programs) to buy the hardware from them, too.

   Check out Outbound. The only Apple hardware required is the ROM.

Check out earlier discussions on Outbound.  How many systems can run it?

   >decide to become an Unix fan, I have a handfull of different 
   >systems to select one from, with variing quality and resource
   >consumption (and price, of course). On the Macs side, it isn't my
   >choice, but Apples choice what they decide to support on their
   >machine. 

   Macs can run: MacOS, A/UX, Minix, MachTen, MacMach, OS/9. 
		 (also DOS and Windows if you are desperate)

Well, then.  Jesus, do I have to name *all* the os's you can run on
a pc?  If you want, give me a week and I'll mail you a list.  I won't
post one because I really don't think many people wish to hear about
all of them.

   /s Steve Fuller        sfuller@tamu.edu        Texas A&M University


		---- tomster@wpi.wpi.edu


--
/^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\
|  The bleeding hearts and the artists  \ /  Words of Wisdom, Inc.            |
|  make their stand.  And when they've  / \  Thomas R. Dibble, esquire, C.E.O.|
|  given you their all, some stagger &  \ /  aka, The Tomster, Tomahawk, etc. |
|  fall,  after  all,  it's not  easy,  / \  send mail/ money to:             |
|  banging your heart against some mad  \ /  tomster@wpi.wpi.edu              |
|  bugger's wall. ---R. Waters, _Wall_  / \  (or don't send it at all)        |
\vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv/

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy