HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 17 Nov 92 18:30:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Nov17.183056.22625
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

In article <BxtvKH.IvM@javelin.sim.es.com> mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson) writes:
>In article: <1992Nov16.075934.14251@sequent.com> Paul Penrod responds:
>
>   JH> Nothing on the PC compares to the Mac GUI, however.  There comes a time
> 
>PP> True...
>
>   JH> when you have to drop the dead weight.  The PC has an awful lot of this.  
>   JH> It has a huge variety of programs written for it, yes, but these will be 
>   JH> written for other platforms as DOS (all too slowly) dies.  The ONLY
>   JH> special things about the PC are: number of units operating and unit
>   JH> price.  As other platforms (UNIX and Mac) drop in price, these advantages
>   JH> will SLOWLY fade away.
>   JH>
>   JH> Jess Holle
>
>PP> I hope they do. But, it is the PC environment that is causing
>PP> changes in other platforms such as UNIX. UNIX people want the DOS
>PP> apps, minus the DOS. Apple may have popularized the XEROX GUI way
>PP> of doing things, but it was the PC that made personal computing
>PP> acceptable to business and the masses and drives much of the market
>PP> and development today.
>
>Exactly what changes to UNIX is the PC community cuasing to happen?  More
>applications?
>
>And don't you remember; the PC was late in the personal computer industry.
>Applications like VisiCalc got the PC community going.  VisiCalc wasn't 
>developed on the PC.  And by the way, did you hear that IBM will debut
>its own PDA (like the Newton) within a year or so?  
>
>Yep, that's what I call driving the market. ;)
>
>[MGM]
>

Ever here of Lotus 1-2-3, WordPerfect (blech!), AutoCad, etc. The
list does tend to go on. These apps had their counterparts in the
UNIX environment before they were written, but I find it really
interesting that after they became "standards" in the PC
environment that they were either ported to UNIX, or UNIX apps took
on many of the features they provided and extended their
usefulness. I'd call that at least market influence :)

As for PDA, that's a completely separate issue. My yellow legal
pad, or techincal pad and mechanical pen work just fine for what I
need. I don't think you will find that many programmers trying to
develop on it, or that many users trying to run projections, or
the like. It is in a sense, a pure user's tool.


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 15:34:39 GMT

In <+hz1chq@rpi.edu> johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>In article 722184494@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>In <1ly1r_q@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>
>>>In article 722126636@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>>>In <90x1y=d@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>>>
>>>>[...]
>>>>>>>>>(where accelerated Mac cards are usually 24 bits, as 8 bit accelerated
>>>>>>>>>is overkill; this beefs up the price of course)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why is this overkill? Silicon is cheap these days. Why not
>>>>>>let a specialized CPU do all the drawing, and have the main
>>>>>>CPU free for real work?
>>>>
>>>>>Its unnecessary; you could spend the money on something else.
>>>>>Memory, or a plain ticket to <insert favorite spot here>.
>>>>
>>>>I don't buy that. A CPU can do only one thing at a time. If it
>>>>is busy redrawing an 1 MPixel bitmap, it can't do anything
>>>>else at the same time. Using a general purpose CPU, which 
>>>>doesn't perform that well on that special task, while there
>>>>is other work to do, is a waste of resources, IMHO.
>>
>>>Really? Isn't ANY processor doing ANYTHING a waste of resources
>>>by this argument, since it could hand off the job to specialized
>>>circuits and do something else?
>>
>>No. But having an expensive, general purpose CPU slowly perform 
>>something a cheap, specialized CPU can do much faster, is a waste.
>>

>Really? Why would you say that? It does not seem to follow to me.
>Sounds like you are loading more work on the processor, but if it
>can handle it quickly, this is not a big deal.

By that reasoning, floating point coprocessors are unnecessary,
too.

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
--
      o      (     Wolfgang Strobl    Wolfgang.Strobl@gmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394
     /\        *   GMD - Gesellschaft fuer Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung mbH
   _`\ `_<===      Schloss Birlinghoven, P.O. Box 1316,  | #include   
__(_)/_(_)___.-._  D-5205 Sankt Augustin, Germany        | <std.disclaimer.hpp>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccnw05.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: How MS could annoy Apple
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccnw05.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 00:14:47 GMT

In article 26449@leland.Stanford.EDU, spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:
>Daniel Norman Johnson writes
>>>The NeXT *does* allow you to see two directories at one time:
>>>pull down two file viewers.  They work like the Mac's Finder
>>>windows in this regard.
>> 
>> Uh, no. The Mac does *not* work like that. I know if you start
>> a second file viewer you can have them view different thigns, but
>> that's a pain. I find it more convinient to double-click on a
>> folder and have it open in its own window. This is how the Mac
>> works. As far as I can tell, this is the thing the NeXT does
>> not do.
>
>Sure it does.  Select a folder and hit Command-O.  The folder will  
>open in its own viewer window.  Not as instantaneous as  
>double-clicking, perhaps, but just as effectiva. And any speed  
>advantage you might gain by the Mac approach is negated by the need  
>to go back and close all those folder windows later; if you're just  
>browsing, you often don't need them open.

Now I didn't know NeXTstep did THAT. That's more like it. Still requires
switching between mouse and keyboard tho.

But on the MAc if you hold down the option key they close themselves,
no need to go back.

>> ...  I never have to open more
>> than 4 [finder windows]. Generally this doesn't happen tho
>> as I can just hold down the option key and then whenever I
>> open a folder, the window I double-clicked in to do it closes.
>
>So how do you trace your steps back?  I find the NeXT viewer's  
>graphical path a very useful tool.

"trace my steps back"

I dont know what you mean by that. If I want to see the folders leading
back to the desktop, I can command click on the title bar and get a menu
of them. Is that what you are after?

>> Or I can use list views to put more than one level in one window.
>
>Sounds like the NeXT viewer in browser mode.

It is a little. The browser (as I understand it) displays essentially
your path from / to wherever the rightmost slot is; that is you
get listings of the intermediate directories. Isn't that how it is?

The Mac can do that this way, but it can also expand as many folders
in any given level  that you want to.

>> I also use aliases to shortcut through what is there, so most
>> of the time I can get to the file I want by opening one window,
>> either from the Desktop of my Apple Menu.
>> 
>
>The NeXT viewer's shelf lets you do this.

I know; and the dock lets you launch apps (and documents?) quickly
similarly. Both functions are combined here. This has the (nifty)
effect that I can (and do) have folders on my desktop- no need to have
any finder windows open to open up that games folder! :)

---
			- 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.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:22:52 GMT

In article 5746@wam.umd.edu, rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>In article <1eebbpINN2dk@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an780@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Travis Grundke) writes:
>
>>Macintosh. They've gotten bettter, but not THAT much better. Its still a
>>machine cippled with a 1970s architecture and MS-DOS. Not to mention a
>>processor which has more or less reached its peak with no where left to go.
>
>
>	How is the mac different, in terms of fundamental architecture,
>	from the current PC clone systems?  To be honest, I must be 
>	missing domething--I don't see anything fundamentally groundbreaking
>	about the mac architecture--the differences are mostly
>	cosmetic. 

Leaving the GUI thing aside, most of the changes aren't groundbreaking.
They just don't repeat the mistake in teh Intel architecture. They
make new ones instead. Ditch the 640k barrier, get an 8 meg one instead
(then ditch that too). Have "inteligent" slots and self-configuring keyboards
and mice and stuff. Make it so you can have the mouse on the right OR left. :)

Not terribly earthshaking is it?

>	As to processor, Intel seems to be getting newer, faster chips
>	at a fairly good clip, and most are doing quite well (the i860,
>	unless I'm mistaken, is doing better than Motorola's 88k, and
>	the i960 is now found in at least three printer models..).  
>
>	In fact, Motorola customers have been waiting on the new, faster
>	version of the 88k for almost two years now--and it's _still_ not 
>	done.  
>
>	And a >33mhz 68040?  How about the next chip after that one?  

I tend to agree- Motorola needs to get it butt in gear. The PCs are
just plain old fashioned faster because of this.

>	Motorola makes well designed (read: clean, especially next to
>	Intel) chips, but since they got the 25mhz 68040 out the door
>	(and later, the 33) they've pretty much been floundering.  With
>	Dec and Alpha, that new WISC chip, the R4000 and the Microsparc,
>	Motorola is falling way behind and most of their costumers are
>	trying to move to a different chipset--I seriously wonder if there
>	will _be_ a 68k series chip after the 68060. 

Including Apple, as it happens. so maybe All is Not Lost Yet.

>	I like their work.  It's too bad that the 88k has bugs (cache) 
>	and that they don't seem to be able to get the 2nd generation
>	out the door (even for an entirely new family..).  I hope that
>	they'll produce a helluva PowerPC chip, because the way the
>	market is heading, they're going to need it.  Even Apple is 
>	moving away from the M68k.[Sun already left].  I wonder who'll
>	be left--Commodore?  MAybe--they certainly don't have any 
>	surprises coming.

I dount commodore will leave the 68k until its discontinued. (if then)
:)


---
			- 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.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 02:38:24 GMT

In article: <GERRY.92Nov17180007@onion.cmu.edu> states:

GR> Mac zealots, like mmunson for exmaple, remind me of xian
GR> fundementalists.  No matter what evidence you shove in front of their
GR> face, they simply ignore it.  Go ahead Mark, enjoy your Mac.  It's a
GR> toy computer, but hey, if you like it, then fine.  Just don't try to
GR> change the world so that I have to suffer with your religion.

GR> --
GR> Gerry Roston (gerry@cmu.edu)    | The vanity and presumption of governing
GR> Field Robotics Center,          | beyond the grave, is the most ridiculous
GR> Carnegie Mellon University      | and insolent of all tyrannies.  Man has no
GR> Pittsburgh, PA, 15213           | property in man; neither has any generation
GR> (412) 268-3856                  | property in the generations that are to
GR>                                 | follow.  Thomas Paine


Hmm..  What evidence have we seen?   "...it won't format floppies in the
backgroun."  "...it's multitasking ins't pre-emptive."  "It's too expensive."

I'm not ignoring this stuff, I just don't think it's really that important
when compared with the rest of the positive evidence.

You folks just need to lighten up a little.  This IS the Mac-Advocacy board.
If you're really offended by hearing about the good and bad points of the
Macintosh, then why are you here?  You don't see me on the Amiga. NeXT or PC
oriented advocacy boards trying to convert the world.

BTW:  I'm running on an X/UNIX workstations right now.  I must be too much
of a Mac zealot to know the difference right?

[MGM] (short form)

(long form / how to contact me) :

Mark G. Munson  (mmunson&animal.es.com) | Spoken here:  ANSI C     Mac/GSToolbox
Engineer / Visual Simulation            |               SAS        MVS
Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp.       |               Pascal     UNIX
POB 58700, SLC, UT 84158                |               BASIC      MS-DOS
(801) 582-5847                          |               ForTran    UNIX

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: How MS could annoy Apple
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 22:53:40 GMT

Daniel Norman Johnson writes
>>The NeXT *does* allow you to see two directories at one time:
>>pull down two file viewers.  They work like the Mac's Finder
>>windows in this regard.
> 
> Uh, no. The Mac does *not* work like that. I know if you start
> a second file viewer you can have them view different thigns, but
> that's a pain. I find it more convinient to double-click on a
> folder and have it open in its own window. This is how the Mac
> works. As far as I can tell, this is the thing the NeXT does
> not do.

Sure it does.  Select a folder and hit Command-O.  The folder will  
open in its own viewer window.  Not as instantaneous as  
double-clicking, perhaps, but just as effectiva. And any speed  
advantage you might gain by the Mac approach is negated by the need  
to go back and close all those folder windows later; if you're just  
browsing, you often don't need them open.

> ...  I never have to open more
> than 4 [finder windows]. Generally this doesn't happen tho
> as I can just hold down the option key and then whenever I
> open a folder, the window I double-clicked in to do it closes.

So how do you trace your steps back?  I find the NeXT viewer's  
graphical path a very useful tool.

> Or I can use list views to put more than one level in one window.

Sounds like the NeXT viewer in browser mode.

> I also use aliases to shortcut through what is there, so most
> of the time I can get to the file I want by opening one window,
> either from the Desktop of my Apple Menu.
> 

The NeXT viewer's shelf lets you do this.

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2663 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:2623
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 12:18:34 EST
From: Spiro the Spiny Goldfish <MXD118@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
 <Bxr2Br.Fqw@news.cso.uiuc.edu>

In article <Bxr2Br.Fqw@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, cole@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Sandra
Stewart-Cole) says:
>
>hmm... can you REALLY create a program in DOS or Windows that demands a 1Mb
>heap and never be concerned with the odd little boundary problems in memory?
>Speaking from direct experience, I can assure you that writing a Mac program
>with such demands really DOES mean transparency for memory. If there is a way
>to have similar ease (i.e. never notice that you are using so much space) in
>Windows or especially in DOS, I'd love to know what development package allows
>it.

You can in OS/2 2.0, but not in DOS or Windows.
----
Mike Dahmus       MXD118@PSUVM  or  dahmus@cs.psu.edu
TEAM OS/2
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:56:20 GMT

In article 722184494@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>In <1ly1r_q@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>
>>In article 722126636@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>>In <90x1y=d@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>>
>>>[...]
>>>>>>>>(where accelerated Mac cards are usually 24 bits, as 8 bit accelerated
>>>>>>>>is overkill; this beefs up the price of course)
>>>>>
>>>>>Why is this overkill? Silicon is cheap these days. Why not
>>>>>let a specialized CPU do all the drawing, and have the main
>>>>>CPU free for real work?
>>>
>>>>Its unnecessary; you could spend the money on something else.
>>>>Memory, or a plain ticket to <insert favorite spot here>.
>>>
>>>I don't buy that. A CPU can do only one thing at a time. If it
>>>is busy redrawing an 1 MPixel bitmap, it can't do anything
>>>else at the same time. Using a general purpose CPU, which 
>>>doesn't perform that well on that special task, while there
>>>is other work to do, is a waste of resources, IMHO.
>
>>Really? Isn't ANY processor doing ANYTHING a waste of resources
>>by this argument, since it could hand off the job to specialized
>>circuits and do something else?
>
>No. But having an expensive, general purpose CPU slowly perform 
>something a cheap, specialized CPU can do much faster, is a waste.
>

Really? Why would you say that? It does not seem to follow to me.
Sounds like you are loading more work on the processor, but if it
can handle it quickly, this is not a big deal.

---
			- 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: ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:00:26 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


[lots of arguing deleted.]

Why worry about Mac vs. OS/2.  The Power PC's will, to my knowledge, and
please correct if I am wrong, will run Mac and OS/2 stuff atop of
a combination of AIX and A/UX.

-- 
********** ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) **********
Windows NT:                  * Disclaimer:  I speak for myself *
                             ***********************************
You WANT your hard drive trashed now.
From: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:11:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: rpi.90x1y=d
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

In article 722094659@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
[deletia- an explaination of S3]

Thanx for the explaination of S3.
>
>>>>Somebody else did; its 8 bits deep but 1000someodd by 1000someodd.
>>>>(where accelerated Mac cards are usually 24 bits, as 8 bit accelerated
>>>>is overkill; this beefs up the price of course)
>
>Why is this overkill? Silicon is cheap these days. Why not
>let a specialized CPU do all the drawing, and have the main
>CPU free for real work?

Its unnecessary; you could spend the money on something else.
Memory, or a plain ticket to <insert favorite spot here>.
---
			- 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.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 07:18:37 GMT

>If all a person wants to do is write a report, then choice your
>poison. If you want to solve a problem, such as 3D rendering of
>seismic data, while handling on the fly analysis of incoming data
>via a satellite link, and shuffle all this around several differnt
>kinds of networks, while still being able to run about 99% of all
>DOS and windows software out there, then the IBM is the most cost
>effective choice. Granted you could shred a Mac and stuff all the
>hardware in it to do these kinds of things, but it would no longer
>be a Mac according to Apple's definition.

I have rendered 3D seismic data on my Mac (depending on your definition
of render, this was a Matlab demo with 3D surface plots; I've also
_rendered_ stuff on my Mac).  I know people who analyze incoming data
on the fly with their Mac (though it is stock data via phone line, not
satalite, but what's the difference computer-wise).  I've done more
than my share of shuffling data/files/programs over networks of various 
sorts.  I couldn't POSSIBLY care less about running Windows or DOS
software, but Soft AT is good enough if I am FORCED to run an occasional
DOS program.  Now what was it about the PC that made it an more effective
choice for all of these things.  Oh, yeah, I know, enough bone-heads
bought them for long enough that they have a huge market inertia.

Nothing on the PC compares to the Mac GUI, however.  There comes a time 
when you have to drop the dead weight.  The PC has an awful lot of this.  
It has a huge variety of programs written for it, yes, but these will be 
written for other platforms as DOS (all too slowly) dies.  The ONLY
special things about the PC are: number of units operating and unit
price.  As other platforms (UNIX and Mac) drop in price, these advantages
will SLOWLY fade away.

Jess Holle
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy