HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:22:04 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Nov13.141945.18628@itsmail1.hamilton.edu>, jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
> I looked -- oh, so briefly -- longingly at one of the first Macs
> demonstrated around here in, what, 1984?  It sure seemed nifty.  But
> when I asked the salesdroid about getting the the CLI, his reaction was
> a befuddled "what?"  I finally made it clear what I meant and he finally
> made it clear to me that I couldn't.  

Well, fact of the matter is, you don't want one. You just think you do.
A couple of years of Mac use would probably condition it out of you... <grin>

> That was the end of the Mac for
> me, never mind its outrageous price (for the 128K Mac!  MacWrite could
> hold, what, six double-spaced typed pages of test?  What a joke!) 

It was 10 pages. I remember. Of course, MacWrite 2.2 fixed all that by making
the documents disk instead of memory based.

> and closed archetecture (single source?  No, thanks!) 

The close architecture was overcome in 1987 with the SE and Mac II. That's
when I bought my first Mac. 

> That, I susepct, keeps it in its fringe position as much as price and
> closed architecture.  

The closed architecture has been gone for 5 years. 

The prices have substantially nose-dived for the last 2, if not 3 years.

Why are you repeating these old, long dead arguments?

> Mac heads have no choice.  

Not true! Mac heads have lots of choices! There's something like 17 different
models of Macintoshes ever made! If you read MacWeek, we're likely to see
a dozen more this year alone! Tons of choices!

> Windows and, even more, OS/2 users do have a choice.  
> I'll take choice any day.

OS/2 users don't have much choice at all when it comes to applications software.
There's precious little.

> Besides, those screens were so darn small!  

Uh, we got over the small screens in 1987. You don't have to have a 9"
screen unless you WANT one. Today you can get a screen bigger than
your desk if you want to.

> Such bad resolution!  

The 9" screen was 72 dpi, and sharp as a razor. Today's displays are
better over all. 

> And that 90-day Apple warranty!  

Ancient history. The warranty is now 1 year. That was abolished, in what,
1989?

> Reliance on dealers for service (the
> average Apple dealer in this area lasts about 2 years).  Yikes!

Agh! Now you got me. You're right. Mac just ain't worth it.





(Just kidding....)






-- 
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.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: rvenkate@ih-nxt07 (R A Venkateswar)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots (actually Help)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:57:24 GMT

shebs@apple.com (Stan Shebs) writes:

>In article <Af0yrAm00iUxM3GQJj@andrew.cmu.edu>, Carl B Jabido
><cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu> wrote:

>>  One thing I hate is that if Macs are supposed to be the "easy" computer
>> to use, how come there is no standard Help menu on menu bars?  Yes there
>> is balloon help, that's if you want an annoying thing popping up
>> wherever you move your mouse, only to tell you "That's a title bar,
>> click and hold to move the window"!  Big deal!!  There should be a
>> standard Help menu on the menu bar. [...]

>Balloon help *is* the standard Help facility.  If applications don't use
>it, that's not Apple's or the Mac's fault.

I don't believe that Apple couldn't improve the help on applications if
they really wanted to. To put it in the words of someone who posted to
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy, balloon help is certainly "drool-proof".
Disclaiming responsibility is not what I would expect from a company like
Apple - the only reason that Apple is successful now is because they've
listened to and acted on peoples' complaints. When (and if) they stop
doing that, they're finished.

<stuff about how CMU people are not normal>
<stuff about how OS/2's help is very nice >
<stuff about how online documentation is a sign of bad design,
  and how no help implies an intuitive design that normal people
 can use without manuals or online help>


>Stan Shebs
>shebs@apple.com
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: EGGPLANT, IMPLANT, EMPATH, BLAZEPLANT...
Date: 23 Nov 92 15:52:55 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Nov21.190704.20647@athena.mit.edu>, fihsu@athena.mit.edu (Hsu I-wei) writes:
> 
> Some dealers will sell Mac ROMS. Get that? They SELL THE ROMS. 

Some people sell stolen goods, too. That doesn't mean they aren't still
stolen.

Mac dealers who sell ROMs are in violation of their contracts with Apple.

The only legal source of Mac ROMs is to buy a Mac (or Outbound). Period.

> Although I'm sure the Mac ROMS are overpriced just like the computer.

Funny, I don't find Macs to be overpriced at all.

As for the ROMs, it is the law the supply and demand. Even on the black
market....

-- 
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.
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Resource fork saves space
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:42:43 GMT
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <1992Nov16.001540.13527@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, rau@ucsu.Colorado.EDU
(Drivvt) says:
>This is the first part.  The second part, I'm not sure about.  I've written
>a "Hello World"-like program on both machines, on the Mac using the
>default environment provided by Borland Turbo Pascal (80x25 col text wind),
>and the Mac app was _still_ smaller!  Anybody know why, more specifically?

I'm not sure how the 'text mode' is implemented on the Mac. But if it is also
part of the Mac ROMs i.e. the normal MAC routines can be forced to emulate
text mode by simply calling them with some default parameters then its the same
explanation like the Windows comparison. Turbo Pascal for the PC doesn't use
DOS for screen output. Instead it uses its own CRT unit for speed. I don't know
the size but it sure will be several kB. A HELLO WORLD  is usually much shorter
than that.

Another (partial) explanation is that e.g. Winword 2.0 and Word 5.0 which are
considered equal in functionality are not. I've not looked very hard but I
found at least one or two features of Winword 2.0 that were missing in Word
5.0. Of course that alone doesn't explain the HUGE difference in size.

Michael Bode.
From: faheyr@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Bob Fahey)
Subject: Multiple button mice vs keys(was:Macintosh advocacy (really!))
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:03:02 GMT

In <1992Nov20.000816.5458@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle) writes:

>For all of those who moan ceaselessly about the Mac's single mouse button
>being inadequate, there are two VERY simple answers.

>1)  As others have mentioned, there are multiple button mice available.

>and MOST IMPORTANTLY

>2)  There are much more intuitive ways to provide extra features quickly
>    than by using extra mouse buttons.

>One many Mac programs, holding down one or more of the 4 modifier keys:
>Shift, Control, Option, and Command, will change the behavior of mouse 
>clicks.  This gives 16 different possible mouse clicks (2^4, from 4
>buttons possible states, on and off).  Nobody actually uses all 16
>possibilities to my knowledge, however, some programs use as many as 5
>or 6.

[good explanation of possible key uses deleted]

This isn't meant as a flame, so please don't take it that way...
I know what you are saying about using the keyboard is a viable alternative
to multiple mice buttons, but it seems a bit complex to do. Some people's
arguments for Apple's choice of a single button mouse was that using 2 or
more buttons would be too "complex" or "confusing". Again, don't take
this as a flame, but don't you think that if a user can't remember which
mouse button (out of 2) to use, they will be a bit confused about which key
to press in conjunction with the mouse? (6+ possible keys) I have a
3-button mouse, and there are still some things that I need to do while
holding a key. I have a hard time remembering if it is the 2nd button with
the shift and alt keys, or the first button with control, or.......

My point is that swapping the 2nd mouse button to a key-mouse combination
is certainly not easier to remember than a 2-button mouse.

I know there are multiple button mice available for the mac, but does the
OS support those buttons? If so, is their use standard between programs?
Again, if so, then why won't Apple ship a multiple button mouse as standard?

just curious,
bob
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Resource fork saves space
Date: 23 Nov 92 18:18:44 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <aland.721768951@berry.cs.brandeis.edu>, aland@cs.brandeis.edu (Alan D.) writes:
> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:
>>Here is an interesting factoid.  The Macintosh has, on average,
>>the smallest sized apps for any viable computer platform.
> 
>>Example:
> 
>>WordPerfect  Mac ~4-5meg   Win3:10 MB  UNIX ~10 MB
> 
>>Does the resource fork system have something to do with this?
> 
> No; the reason is (primarily) that most of the functionality of the
> Graphical User Interface (GUI) is contained in the system software on
> the Macintosh, while on the other platforms you refer to each
> applicatoin needs to contain more code for the GUI.

I disagree.

Windows 3 after all has the user interface built into the machine. And most
Unix machines or X or some other windowing system.

There certainly must be some cause. If the other versions consist of lots
of small files in various folders, that may contribute a lot to the
situation -- something that a resource fork could solve.

I believe the source of this application bloat is some other, overlooked
difference in the platforms.

-- 
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.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: spaul@acs.ucalgary.ca (Sujeet Paul)
Subject: Re: Newton tech (was The future of Apple)
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:50:39 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta

In article <ewright.722107856@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <Cohena-161192121927@l30346.mdc.com> Cohena@mdc.com (Andy Cohen) writes:
>
>>I will also not pay $1K for an item which can be dropped or stolen.  
>
>So, what kid of car do you drive? :-)

Where is this $1K figure coming from I read somewhere the Newton
will be around $500.  However just like a car or anything else
these days once you add in the options this price will be a lot
more (after all who else are you going to go to for options).

The Newton sounds like to me as taking PenTops and Laptops and
packing them into something the size of an Sharp Electronic
organizer.  Especially since Apple and Sharp are co-devloping the Newton.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie)
Subject: Re: Resource fork saves space
Originator: torrie@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 23 Nov 92 06:09:42 GMT

ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:

>RE: Winword 2.0 vs. Word 5.0

>Word 5.1 adds the features that were lacking.

  Perhaps you can find the macro language for me in 5.1??

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu 
Embrace rationalism, reject superstition.           Break away from the past.
"...there is only one thing worse than having marketing people on a project,
 and that is having no marketing people on a project."  - Larry Tesler.
From: winer@husc10.harvard.edu (Adam Winer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!) SCROLL BARS
Date: 17 Nov 92 17:05:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc10.winer.722019921
 <1992Nov11.192028.22300@news.Hawaii.Edu> <1992Nov12.225848.114240@watson.ibm.com> <terjer-171192125758@majestix.ifi.unit.no>

On the Mac it is VERY possible to have scroll bars scroll in real time.
You don't need to hack the system at all.  The ability has been there
since the Mac 128k.  It's just a question of what the application writer
wants.  Most have opted against it, because it is (obviously) slower
than the standard method.  But that doesn't mean it's impossible.

If you haven't read the Inside Mac series, don't talk about what Macs
can and cannot do.

Adam
-- 
Adam Winer		| The number you have reached is imaginary.
WINER@HARVARD.EDU	| Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and
                        | try again.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:30:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov14.000847.10948@cuug.ab.ca> Terry Wilcox responds to MM:

  >  > It's funny...  now all the Macintosh people are saying exactly what
  >  > all the PC people said when Macintosh came out...  you guys forget too
  >  > quickly...
  >
  >
  >  > andrew

  MM> Lack of good software was a valid point then and it still is now.  What's
  MM> different between the PC argment and the Mac argument is that the Mac
  MM> only had a few excellent applications compared to a large collection of
  MM> less impressive PC applications.

TW> Large? It was enormous.

Go back and look at a PC magazine from '85.  There were a lot of PC titles
then, but it doesn't even compare with the number of significant Mac
titles today.  

  MM> Now, the Mac has a large collection of excellent applications, and the 
  MM> others have a smaller subset of poorer applications, and an even smaller
  MM> base of equivalent applications.

TW> I would guess there are far fewer poor applications on the NeXT and Amiga
TW> combined than on the Mac. That's because the Mac has more applications.

We were talking about PC applications here.  Your response seems... confused!


  MM> Just look at the Amiga.  Lots of titles, but the quality is inferior.  But
  MM> hey, it was cheaper!  What a deal!?

  MM>[MGM]


TW> Well, that's an opinion. Of course that's all it is. I often hear
TW> DOS users say 'The Mac is a toy'. That's another opinion. They're 
TW> both about equally valid.

TW> Terry Wilcox

I suppose that if I said "a Yugo is inferior to a Ford Probe." you'd claim
that this was only an opinion and was equally valid to its converse. 


There was an important point being made here about the distinction between
the PC vs. Mac argument of '84/85 and todays arguments in favor of the Mac.
It's too bad that the TW didn't get the major point.


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie)
Subject: Re: How MS could annoy Apple
Originator: torrie@Xenon.Stanford.EDU
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
Date: 23 Nov 92 06:03:04 GMT

spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:

>> 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.

  Hold down the Cmd key and click on the window's titlebar.  This
gives you a pop up menu list of the path followed to this directory;
you can select an item, and that window will open.

  I've been using NeXTs for over a year, and I still find the Workspace
Browser to be clumsier in actual use than the Finder on the Mac.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Torrie.  Stanford University, Class of 199?       torrie@cs.stanford.edu 
Embrace rationalism, reject superstition.           Break away from the past.
"...there is only one thing worse than having marketing people on a project,
 and that is having no marketing people on a project."  - Larry Tesler.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: rau@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Drivvt)
Subject: Re: Resource fork saves space
Organization: Menzoberranzan Computer Networking 
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 00:15:40 GMT

In <83560@ut-emx.uucp> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:
>
>Here is an interesting factoid.  The Macintosh has, on average,
>the smallest sized apps for any viable computer platform.
>
>Example:
>WordPerfect  Mac ~4-5meg   Win3:10 MB  UNIX ~10 MB
>
>Does the resource fork system have something to do with this?
>
	Not specifically.  They tend to be smaller because a huge chunk of
the user interface code is standardized in ROM and in the system file.
This is the first part.  The second part, I'm not sure about.  I've written
a "Hello World"-like program on both machines, on the Mac using the
default environment provided by Borland Turbo Pascal (80x25 col text wind),
and the Mac app was _still_ smaller!  Anybody know why, more specifically?

-- 
Drivvt Daermon N'a'shezbaernon (Drow)   /\ Utah Saints? You mean Mormons, right?
Menzoberranzan  Computer  Networking /\/' \ Live for CPU time, die for CPU time.
rau@ucsu.colorado.edu               /' \'' \ Where would I be without IBM? InSoc
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ n''''' \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: edcrwfrd@unlv.edu (Edward Crawford)
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!)
Organization: UNLV
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 18:02:23 GMT

Youve been saying that back ground apps on the mac dont do anything
until they are brought into the foreground?! What gave you that idea?
I run First Class in the back ground all the time while im using
my computer. I print files in the background while i use my computer,
and uncompress and compress stuff in the background while i use my
computer. And no, none of these applications are in the foreground.
I even have a program that empties my trash in the background.
And now you are telling me that my computer cant do that? Well
dont tell that to my computer because it doesnt know that.

Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.advocacy:2648 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:29238
From: edcrwfrd@unlv.edu (Edward Crawford)
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!)
Organization: UNLV
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 05:12:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.204548.490@leland.Stanford.EDU> spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu writes:

>That's all very nice, and a great improvement over the likes of DOS,  
>which doesn't even let you do such minimal multitasking.  But can you  
>run a Mathematica job in the background while you're working in your  
>word processor?

Yes
>  Can you have your data base program executing a  
>search while you're using your spreadsheet?

Yes

>  Can you compile a  
>program while reading mail and playing a game?

Yes, but i find it tough to read mail and play a game at the
same time.

>  There's more to  
>multitasking than being able to do a few minor household chores in  
>the background.
>

No kidding, thats why i gave you examplas that where not household 
chores (exept for empting the trash :) ) What would give you
the idea that the mac couldnt do stuff in the background?
Have you ever actually used a mac? A mac with
MultiFinder or System 7?

>--
>-
>Stefano Pagiola
>Food Research Institute, Stanford University
>spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
>spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: dtiberio@csws19.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio)
Subject: Re: EGGPLANT, IMPLANT, EMPATH, BLAZEPLANT...
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 01:01:20 GMT

In article <37070@cbmvax.commodore.com> kominetz@cbmvax.commodore.com (John Kominetz - CATS) writes:

>I have not actually *seen* an Emplant board.  I have heard some of the
>following from Compuserve, but it is just hearsay at this point:
>
>	1.  It is not Workbench 2.0--and therefore neither 3.0--compatible.

	People have said that it should work with 2.0, but is just having
some problems with 2.0. And that does not mean that it isn't 3.0 compatible.

>	2.  It is not 68040 compatible.
>	3.  It may crash on a 68000-based system.

	Or any system! :)
	
>	4.  It requires you to illegally software-copy Mac ROMs.

	It requires you to have Mac roms, in either hardware form or software
form. BTW, today I made a backup of my Workbench disk. Is CBM gonna come 
after me? No, they can't, since the law states that once you buy a software
package for your computer, you have the right to use it on any one computer
at any time. The same goes with your ROM. If you buy a Mac, you can get a 
copy of the ROM via software and use it with AMAX or Emplant legally, so long 
as no two copies run at the same time ie running the original Mac and the
Emplant at the same time is running from two copies.
-- 
      Amiga Graphics Association BBS (516) 473-6351  24 HRS, 14.4k baud
PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT PEROT
    "I don't have any experience in running up a 4 trillion dollar debt."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:32:28 GMT

In article <ewright.722020368@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>>The original user quoted Mac edu prices, Stefano compared NeXT 
>>edu prices, and you insist the comparison is unfair.
>
>Not unfair.  Irrelevent.  The "Net" may think that educational
>prices are a Big Hairy Deal, but the real world, whose purchases
>can make or break a computer company, doesn't really care.  It's
>real-world prices that count.

Exactly. You Mac advocates should stop quoting edu prices.

If the Net isn't the real world, what are you doing here? I thought
you were from the real world.

Terry Wilcox


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy