From: jstc_ss@troi.cc.rochester.edu (j. collins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!)
Date: 19 Nov 92 05:08:00 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Nov18.230148.6720@cs.uow.edu.au> u9147063@cs.uow.edu.au (Richard Barry Ling) writes:

>I have all my function keys bound to commonly used applications, frequently
>entered CLI commands, cut/copy/paste etc. and would be frustrated if I had
>to make trips to the menu bar or wade through systems of requestors for
>these functions.

>With a more complex system, new users can use the menus and requestors, more
>advanced users can hit hotkeys without taking their hands from the keyboard.
>Provided, of course, your keyboard has any decent hotkeys.  Looking at this
>Mac right here running the terminal emulator, I see it only has one
>available (clover key).

actually there are two, the alt/option key and the command key (clover key)?
That and the fact that there are also 15 function keys in front of me.  
Hum that seems to be more than one.

>> The Mac doesn't have preemptive multitasking unless you are running A/UX.
>> Are you running A/UX? No? Well run it and your problem will go away.

>A/UX is expensive, huge, memory hungry, CPU intensive, and requires a Sun
>workstation, which is not a cheap piece of hardware.  And it still does not
>make the Mac pre-emptively multitask, because Macs cannot pre-emptively
>multitask.  Think A/UX will make the problem go away?  Sounds like a source
>of endless new problems to me.

Requires a SUN Workstation.  What?  First off A/UX runs on any mac with a
MMU on it (68030's and up, and 68020's with PMMU's)  Secondly any machine
can pre-emptively multitask.  A 6502 can do it and so can 68030 and a 486 and
any chip.  It is the operating system decides this, not the processor.
As for being expensive, huge, memory hungry, CPU intensive, so is any unix
system, just A/UX is worse.  Before you start saying things, please get your
facts straight.


>I accept it, and only feel glad that Commodore did not lock its users into
>non-proportional scroll bars, just for the sake of the first few hours when
>the new user is learning to use the system.  I have no recollection of ever
>being confused by proportional scroll bars while learning about my system.

This is personal preference.  I have worked with both and I have not had 
problem with either.  I had never given it any thought actually until
this STUPID argument about which is better and why.


>Many of the Mac advocacy articles here, arguing about graphics quality,
>sound, multitasking, you name it, seem to consist solely of several
>instances of the phrase "This is not an issue in System 7".  How many Mac
>users have System 7?  None that I know.  I certainly can't run it on this
>machine.

Actually any macintosh plus and above can run system 7.  And to answer your
other question about how many mac users have system 7.  I would have to say
close to half.  All new machines are sold with it.  I also work at the
computing center and have had the opportunity to see that most areas of the
university have upgraded their macintoshes to system 7.

>Yes folks, it's the familiar usenet "get a life" catch-phrase; grossly
>overused and devoid of meaning.  Think about it - did using this really add
>anything to your arguments?

No, but it can be said that you should pay attention to what you say from
now on, since a large portion of your reply was filled with inaccuracies.


-justin m. collins <jstc_ss@troi.cc.rochester.edu>