From: zmyd02@hou.amoco.com (Denton Meredith)
Subject: Re: "Windoze" slow? Naah...Re: pc and mac:
Reply-To: zmyd02@hou.amoco.com
Organization: Amoco
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:31:13 GMT

In article 1go0plINNjpo@ub.d.umn.edu, cbusch@ub.d.umn.edu (Chris) writes:
>A view observations:
>    The mac mouse appears not to be accelerated.  The mouse pointer
>didnt move as nicely as microsoft mice.  (Not to mention the mouse has
>only one button.

The mac mouse has a variety of acceleration settings available under the apple menu, plus there's shareware available (Mouse2, for one) that speeds it up even more.  Some of us can't stand mice with more than one button, as the chaotic world of Windows appears not to have a universal standard for which button does what.

>    The mac appears to lack a built in help system.  I was using
>mathematica and there wasnt any builtin help.

By "built-in help" what do you mean?  Availability of help is usually a function of the program (does or doesn't have help).  Mac doesn't prohibit you from accessing supplied help files, and does provide help (if the program supports it) through balloon help under System 7.

>    If the mac is suppose to be truly a multitasking system, then why do
>you have to load multifinder on top of the mac os?

You don't have to load multifinder "on top of the mac os," it's part of the O.S.  In System 6.0.x, you're GIVEN THE OPTION of multitasking or not multitasking.  Having the ability to turn off multitasking IS AN ADVANTAGE when you've got a neophyte on a machine who's just trying to learn his/her way around, because multitasking is just another source of confusion for him/her until s/he figures everything else out.  System 7 doesn't let you turn off multitasking, unfortunately.

>    If macs are catching on so much then why has windows os sold more
>copies than all the macs sold?

Think about it...how many IBM's plus clones are out there?  A LOT.  The ironic thing is how DOS has been touted as *the* O.S. to use for so long, yet when Windows came out, all the people who couldn't perform even the most rudimentary tasks on their machines came a-runnin' for their "savior", which makes their machines attempt to be mac-like.

>    Why is it, that macs are only compared to pc's that are base models,
>despite the fact that very inexpensive add-ons exist for the pc.

Where are macs only compared to base pc's?  

>    If the mac was so successful, then why was apple so eager to be
>friends with ibm.

And conversely, why was IBM so eager to be friends with Apple?  That's a two-sided coin you've flipped.  Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that last month (quarter?  I read this in MacLeak and forgot) Apple sold more new units than IBM did, and that IBM is rapidly losing market share?  What about today's announced massive personnel layoff?  Gee, don't think that would have anything to do with it, do you?

>    Why hasnt motorola keep up to pace with intel with product design?

I think that's your opinion, not a fact.


>    If the mac was so successful, why are so many mac software companies
>porting over their apps to windows?

Again, the two-sided coin...why have so many Windows applications been ported to the Mac?  Simple...you establish a market share in as many venues as possible TO INCREASE YOUR PROFITS.  If Mac was not successful, I think Microsoft, Lotus, etcetera would not have wasted time designing Excel, 1-2-3, etcetera, for the Mac.

>    If macs are designed so well, why are they now using pc-like
>keyboards?

What keyboard would you have us use?  QWERTY is just about it!  If you're referring to the presence of function keys, nobody ever said function keys sucked.  It's just that when you're first learning a new program it's impossible to remember (and a pain in the ass to look up) what each Fkey does.  Most software allows virtually all functions to be accessed from the keyboard as a command-key sequence, from an Fkey, or from the menu via the mouse.  Very handy--everyone uses that which is most comfortable.

>    If macs are so easy to use, then why is it that in our computers
>labs that macs are generally unused.  (This is very true.)

Gee, maybe it's because a lot of narrow-minded pencil-necked DOS geeks who've never even TOUCHED a Mac (much less actually use one enough to know anything about it) are running around spouting off about how horrible Macs are and potential users are thus put off! (Not that I would ever accuse YOU of this.)  I recently graduated from a very large university with a tremendous number of Macs, and let me tell you, you can hardly get near them for all the people clamoring to use them.


>   
>
>very confused about the big deal about macs,
>-CB
>
>Apparently, the only decent macs are big macs and whoppers are better
>anywaz.    


Not confused at all about PC's....but wonder why people who use them can't type.

Meredith "Don't knock 'em till you've tried 'em!" Denton