From: tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM Funny
Date: 1 Oct 92 14:45:44
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA 01609-2280
	<6057.2ac6dd05@hayes.com> <1992Sep30.011703.4998@NeoSoft.com>
	<6092.2ac9c038@hayes.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: bcoleman@hayes.com's message of 30 Sep 92 14:56:56 EDT

In article <6092.2ac9c038@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:

   In article <1992Sep30.011703.4998@NeoSoft.com>, peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
   > 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.

   Easier to learn? GACK! No way. There's little consistancy between applications.
   Heck, applications can't even decide on a consistant way to stop a program,
   at least all Mac applications have File / Quit.

Well, with all the Windows programs I have, that is exactly where the 'quit'
option is.  Running a DOS app in a window is a bit different, of course,
but we are talking Windows here, not DOS.

   More Powerful? Well, that's quite vague. It is hard to determine what you
   mean by "powerful." Do you mean capable? About the only thing that Windows
   is capable of doing that you can't do on the Mac involves dynamic memory
   allocation of storage between applications. OTOH, there's a whole lot of
   things you can't do under Windows that you can do on the Mac, from switching
   depth on the fly and multiple monitors, to AppleEvents and Publish / Subscribe
   over a network. I don't think this qualifies as "more powerful."

   More convienient? That's subjective. I don't know how you could objectively
   measure that.

The same way you have 'proven' that DOS is less convenient than a Mac.

   Less surprising. NOT! Windows lacks consistancy between applications. Quick!
   What do the middle and right buttons do on the Windows mouse? "Left up to
   the Application." Faugh. Without guidelines, there's no consistancy. Having
   vague or incomplete guidelines is even worse.

Quick!  what do the left and middle buttons do on the Mac?!?   ... :->


   More easily generalisable. Again, no consistancy, no chance of generalization.

   Better Feedback? In what way? You must be referring to a specific operation.
   On a Mac you can jam a diskette in the drive and the OS knows
   you've done this. Under Windows, you still have to tell the File manager
   to wake up and read the disk again. This is better feedback?

   So much for those arguments.

   >> 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.

   Wrong. You bring up a dialog window, and ALT <ET>, ALT <EC> and ALT <EP>
   (Cut, Copy, and Paste, respectively) won't work. Note that your message didn't
   even have these correct, or perhaps there's even more variance between apps
   than I thought.

Well, maybe I only use a very limited subset of Windows apps (and proud of it
:->  ), but the Alt-<ET> for Cut and Alt-<EP> for paste worked in all of them.
What apps do these *not* work in?

   No, to use shortcuts consistantly, you can't reply on ALT menu activation.
   You have to use Shift-DEL, Control-Ins and Shift-Ins for Cut, Copy and Paste,
   respectively. These will actually work in the dialog box.

   What's more, many important applications don't even support this type of
   editing. Like the Program Manager or the File Manager. Ugh.

Now what would you do with this in the PM?  FM, I can understand; the
nomenclature has switched from cut&paste to move and copy, but...

   You proved my point by demonstrating the inconsistant behavior of Windows.
   QED.

He did?

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

   There's no such shortcut. You print by pressing Command-P. You select 
   draft mode in the subsequent job dialog. Draft mode looks horrible,
   and isn't available on a lot of printers (like LaserWriters). So, there's
   really no point in a specific keyboard shortcut.

   I picked a generic example -- Cut, Copy and Paste. Things that you use all
   the time in every application (practically). Notice that you picked an 
   obscure example. 

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

   I click the application icon in the upper right hand corner and can see
   the list. Of course, I can also see any windows any of those applications have
   open (unless they are hidden).

   > On the Mac, how do you get proportional scrollbars?

   I don't even know what these are. Depending on what you mean, such behavior
   might even violate Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines.

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

   Nope. The menu bar stays up at the top of the screen where you can get to it
   accurately (even in the face of Fitt's law) because vertical overshoot is
   absorbed by reaching the top of the screen.

I'd have to agree here.  One of the worst experiences I've had in Windows
is trying to pull down a menu but instead grabbing the title bar of the
app and dragging *it* down the screen.  The better point of this is that
the menu bar is more closely associated with the application than if it were
at the top of the screen.

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

   I disagree. Come back in 5 years when there's some modicum of consistancy.

In five years, hopefully, the DOS/Windows combo will have gone out the
window.  (NPI).

   >> 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.

   True. It is more mature, and that helps a lot. There's also a number of
   mature development tools for applications. From class libraries like MacApp
   and TCL to interface building tools like Prototyper, AppMaker and Prograph.

   Windows doesn't (yet) have tools of this caliber.

Well, Borland products have the Prototyper.  There are quite a few neat toys
listed on the back of Borland C++.

   >> > 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.

   I wouldn't be so generous. Remember that MS has 70% of the Macintosh 
   Applications market. 

What do you mean here?
BTW, I would tend to disagree.  I view Excel as their only noteworthy product,
Windows as only an environment from which I can run Excel.

   > Hey, you want to stop that *quit buying Microsoft products*. 

   Heh, heh. I don't own any MS products. At work, I have MS Word 4.0 because
   I have need for it. Other members in other departments aren't so enlightened,
   and I have to look at their files. (I prefer WriteNow)

This really has little to do with the discussion, but (in the hopes of this
becomming a bash-MS newsgroup) about the saddest quote I ever read was
(I forget who said it) "I know, Turbo-C is far superior to Microsoft C,
but I use the MS product because it is industry standard."  Truly pitiful
that 'industry standards' are valued more highly than innovation and
efficiency, IMO.

   > 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.

   If you believe that, then you believe that Apple should win the MS/HP suit.
   You can't have it both ways. Either the rights are there, or they are not.

I don' remember him saying that he believed Xerox would win a lawsuit.  He
just said that Apple marketted and claimed the profits to some Xerox 
applications.  This just happens to be the same thing that Apple is saying 
about MicroSoft.

   >> 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.

   UGH! I actually had the priviledge of USING a Star (back in 1983, before
   there ever was a Mac). 

   It wasn't better than the Mac. I'd say it was barely usable. The Help system
   was awful. And many times there were hidden modes were you couldn't do 
   something that wasn't obvious.

   The Star wasn't better than the Mac. Not by far. It wasn't even better than
   the Lisa, aside from being more expensive.

These are opinions, not facts, and subjective to boot.  To paraphrase yourself,
'How are you going to proove it?'

	(dont take that seriously.  I have no knowledge of the Star and,
		frankly, don't want any.)

   -- 
   Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958
   Principal Software Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QO
   Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcoleman
   POB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   ! Internet: bcoleman%hayes@uunet.uu.net
   Disclaimer: "My employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."
   Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve Hackett.

		---- 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