HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 22:58:20 GMT

In article:  <92283.165157ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET> Michael Bode writes:

> Perhaps he thinks more of how the UI works to the user, not to the programmer.
> WPS sees the icons on the screen as objects i.e. things that have some
> properties and can perform some actions. What actions an icon or a group of
> selected icons can perform do you see by clicking on it with your mouse. What
> properties it has you see in its settings notebook. And interaction between
> icons is by drag/drop. The Mac OS has this partly but its not consequently
> used. In System 6 you can`t print a document by dropping it on a printer icon.
> Don`t know about System 7. But I`m pretty sure to format a floppy in System 7
> you have to select the floppy icon and then hunt in the menu bar for a format
> option. In OS/2 you click on the icon with your right mouse button and select
> from the objects menu.

> The difference is: in MacOS you ask the computer (i.e. menu bar) what can I do
> with that object (and anything else I see on the screen). In OS/2 you ask the
> object you want to manipulate "What can you do?"


Michael, you should try using a Mac before trying to compare OS/2 to it.

On a Mac, you won't find a printer icon on the desktop.  Icons represent
items that can be opened or operated on (i.e. volumes, files, applications,
etc.).  You won't find printers or drives on the desktop, because you are
supposed to be concerned with documents.


PRINTING FROM THE FINDER

On System 7.0, you could walk up to a Mac with a floppy in hand.  Place
the disk in any available drive.  When the volume appears, double-click
on it to open the volume.  Click on a file that you want to print. Select
'Print' from the 'File' menu (same as in all applications), or use the
keyboard short-cut if you prefer.  The Finder will automatically launch
the application that created the document, bring up the document, and
display the print dialog.  Press 'Enter' or click on OK if printing
options are OK, and the document will be spooled to the printer.  If you
made a mistake, click on 'Cancel' and the document will be put away, the
application will quit, and you will be back where you started.

FORMATING DISKS

Mac users don't have to select drives to perform actions on.  Only the
"Yugo" of computer architectures would require you to do this.  Volumes
appear on the Mac desktop  They usually look like a floppy or HD, but you
can make them look like whatever you wish.

If you place a disk into the drive that is unformated, or is of an
unrecognized format, a dialog will appear.  You can either format
the volume in any of the available formats (Mac HFS, MFS, MS-DOS, ProDOS)
using either high or low density, or you can simply eject the media.
Hunting for a format option isn't a part of the Mac experience.  The 
Mac handles formatting in a very mature manner.


[MGM]
From: johnsd2@vccnw05.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:13:41 GMT

In article <TWL.92Oct9095233@trane.cs.brown.edu>, twl@cs.brown.edu (Ted "Theodore" W. Leung) writes:

[deletia- DDE/AppleEvents]

|> Nan> I know in WPS you can sort the icons of a folder in
|> Nan> name/size/date/etc order, also you can setup the
|> Nan> date/time/currency formats.
|> 
|> The WorldScript services of System 7.1 allow one to mix scripting
|> styles (left to right and right to left) in the same document.  The
|> date/time/currency formatting is a *part* of WorldScript.  This is
|> important for application developers who need to localize their
|> software for foreign markets.  Like Japan.

No. These services have been present in the system since version 1.0.
They are in Inside Mac Volume I, no less (or was that II?)

|> [ big, long, hairy multimedia interface document deleted]
|> 
|> Frankly, as a Mac User, I think that MultiMedia (on either platform)
|> is hype.

Me too, but I think the capabilities this garbage can bring will
be nice. (PC's with sound! What a concept! :)

[deletia- MCS, drivers, etc, WPS, GUI, other acronyms]
-- 
			- 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.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: BinHex
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:12:36 GMT

Can anyone tell me where to I can get a copy of BinHex?  I've got
Stuffit.  I'm still having difficulties FTPing to/from sites
outside of my area.  Is there C source available for BinHex?

Thanks in advance, [MGM]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@lib110.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: the NeXT option (Was Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT)
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:57:22 GMT

In article <CKD.92Oct16173812@loiosh.eff.org>, ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
|> Daniel> == Daniel Norman Johnson <johnsd2@rs6216.ecs.rpi.edu> 
|> 
|>  Daniel> You can (of course) implement a multitasking arrangement with
|>  Daniel> no user interface, so that your program just sits there and
|>  Daniel> computes (or what have you) without comment about it, and the
|>  Daniel> user can switch to annother app or whatever. Its better,
|>  Daniel> however, to put up a movable modal dialog with some text in it
|>  Daniel> saying what the app is doing, and a thermometer, and use the
|>  Daniel> watch cursor, and so on. This requires code. More than one line
|>  Daniel> of it. Now do you see what this has to do with multitasking?
|> 
|> And the same arguments apply to a program if it's the only one you're
|> running (say under System 6 unifinder) or the foreground app.  You still
|> need a watch cursor, a thermometer would be nice, etc, etc, etc.

Yeah, but if you dont multitask you can get away without one better,
or with less of one. You can just put up a watch cursor. If you did
that with a multitasking app, that app will look like it is active
if you put it in the background. It will be hard to tell when the 
computation is finished, also.

If you dont multitask teh interface can also be a simple modal
dialog. That's easier than the movable modal dialog that a background
multitasker needs, certainly. You really should put one of those
up, so the user can tell that he can switch to annother app. Otherwise,
some people (most, I suspect) wont realize they can switch out.

|> There are a number of faceless background apps for System 7 now (like
|> Trashman Engine).  They have no interface, because they don't need it.
|> Yet they multitask.

I know. Im writing one right now. (well, ok, Im posting right now,
but still); I was talking about the more general case of facefull
apps.

-- 
			- 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: rwb00@loon.as (Robert W Beveridge)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I *LIKE* (and didn't) about MS-DOS & Windows
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:25:42 GMT
Reply-To: rwb00@loon.as
Organization: Sun Microsystems


In article 8F6@Novell.COM, mwalker@novell.com (Mel Walker) writes:
>In article <1992Oct11.043554.23550@u.washington.edu> Tim Smith,
>tzs@stein.u.washington.edu writes:
>>>1) Windows comes with some applications!!!  A Word
>>>processor!!!  A painting tool!!!  While they are not
>>>exactly MS Word or MacDraw, they suffice and get the 
>>>average user off the ground.  Apple...bundle something
>>>already!
>>
>>Apple used to do this, but they stopped.  Before they stopped, there
>weren't
>>many writing or painting programs for the Mac.  Why write one when Apple
>is
>>giving them away?  Now there are many paint programs and many write
>programs
>>at many prices.
>
>Apple does give away a simple word processor with the mac: TeachText.
>MSWrite is more powerful, but anyone who wants a word processor buys Word
>or Nisus or WordPerfect or something anyway. Apple realized that they
>could (and should) sell MacWrite, and so stopped bundling it. Microsoft
>realized they couldn't sell MSWrite, and so bundled it.
>
So its a FEATURE of the mac that no useful software is bundled with it ?
From: yjc@po.cwru.edu (Jerome Chan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM Funny
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: 10 Oct 1992 14:08:33 GMT
Organization: The Tofu Society of Singapore
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: b61539.student.cwru.edu

In article <1992Oct10.102922.18130@netcom.com>, jazz@netcom.com (David C.
Navas) wrote:

[ Other Stuff Deleted ]

> 
> Repositioning your hand from the mouse, to the keyboard, and back again is
> a very time-consuming operation.
> 

[ Other Stuff Deleted ]

I think that's a difference between Macintosh and PC applications. The
mouse is used most of the time to select the options available to the user
while the keyboard is used mainly for data entry.

For example, My news reader NewsWatcher. I only use the keyboard when I
want to reply to a message. I use it to type replies or construct new ones.
When I am READING news, I seldom need to use the keyboard so movement
between mouse and keyboard is minimised.

When I am using Nisus (my word processor) to type a letter, I use the
keyboard is type it but the mouse when I want to change fonts or styles. I
don't change fonts or styles that often but when I do often use the mouse
to select words,
to change words or to cut and paste chunks of text. Using the mouse in this
manner is much faster than using the keyboard so I really don't mind
because it saves me time.

It's much better to use a mouse for a Draw/Painting than a keyboard. Doing
artwork with the keyboard is very time consuming but a mouse help speeds up
the process tremendously. When I use SuperPaint to do my artwork, I SELDOM
switch between keyboard and mouse. Most of the work is done with the mouse.

I use Think C to program. I use the mouse to select the active window. When
I use Borland C, I had to press F6 to cycle through the windows or press a
key-combination to list all the windows I want and then select the
approperiate window. Using the mouse on Borland C made it faster.

I'm not too sure if using a mouse in a databases and spreadsheets is easier
than just using the keyboard alone. I don't have much experience with them.

The point of this rambling message is that the mouse is only used when it's
better than the keyboard. Switching between the mouse and keyboard isn't
that much of a hassle compared to the amount of time and work it would
save.

When I started to use the Mac (I had been using a IBM PC clone for several
years), it took me a few days to get used to mousing but now it takes very
little effort to use the mouse or to change between mouse and keyboard.

---
 The Evil Tofu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 01:06:28 GMT

In article <UepPgfu00WB2Ndenoa@andrew.cmu.edu> Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.advocacy: 9-Oct-92 Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2
>and Window.. by Daniel N. Johnson@vccnw0 
>>> Also Carl:
>> |> HAHAHA!!  Chicago font is a piece of SHIT!
>>  
>> Well, I like it fine, but then I have to taste. :)
>> To each his own. Im surprised you find this so improtant. I thot
>> Mac users were the people with font fixations. :)
>
>Yeah they are, but how could you live with a font _that_ ugly?!?!?


If you don't like the Chicago font, then why don't you just change it?  System 7
will allow you to choose any of the available fonts on your system.  Pick
any font, and choose the desired size.  Shoot, you could even put a PC
font in place of Chicago if you wanted (I wouldn't).

While I'm at it, PC users should be aware that you can change the back-
ground pattern too!...  Did I mention that the Mac comes with a mouse?


Have any of you PC gurus used a Mac in the last few years?  It doesn't
look like many of you have driven a Mac lately.
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Date: 9 Oct 92 13:06:47 EDT
Followup-To: onvex.com> <1992oct8.225238.4448@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz>

Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Oct8.225238.4448@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz>, stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Stuart Woolford) writes:
> 
> utter bollocks(tm), the PC speaker is 1 bit, but that is not a great limit
> with programmers as good as the ones who write PC software, even if you cannot
> comprehend it.. 

PC software programmers are good, but Mac ones are better. <grin>

> I have sound players, which use the internal speaker, which sound MUCH 
> better than any old (6bit) MAC I have heard, and as good as the newer
> 8bit, using PCM. I find the 6bit mac's unbearable in comparison.

You must be listening to some very unusual Macs. Macs have had 8-bit 
sound since the start with the original Macintosh. 

And I've heard sounds reproduced under windows with 1-bit speakers. It is
awful. Technically, it is fasinating that it can be done. Realistically,
the quality is retched.

When you say PCM, what do you mean? Sound is analog, is it not? How can it
be PCM?

Or are you saying the 8-bit samples are COMPANDERED, using mu-law or A-law
compandering, as used in PCM?

> so I would say that it is YOU who has no idea of what you are talking about.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle....

-- 
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: arika@cserver.plexus.COM (Arik Anderson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: How to justify a mac
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:53:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: cserver.arika.719160831
Organization: none

I need help from the Mac community to justify the purchase of
at least one Macintosh at my company. We currently have a building
full of PCs running Windows 3.1. Several employees have Macs at
home and would like to convince management to purchase Macs for
the company.

The logical arguements about secretaries being better able to
use Macs won't fly (we've tried). We are a company full of
engineers with Unix workstations and PCs at their desks, all
networked together.

What I'd really like to find are some applications which only
run on a Mac which would really make life easier for either
the engineers or for the managers.

If there are others out there who have convinced their management
to bring Macs into a PC environment, I'd really like to hear how
you did it.

Thanks in advance.
-- 
                 ____________________________________________
  /\  /\        <                Arik A. Anderson            >
 /__\/__\       <   INTERNET:    arika@cserver.plexus.com    >
/   /\   \      <       UUCP:    spool!cserver!arika         >
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: sfuller@tamsun.tamu.edu (Steve Fuller)
Subject: Power PC (was Re: IBM SUCKS!)
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 08:49:02 GMT

In article <mike_steiner-121092131032@192.35.50.131> mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
>
>The first PowerPC chip is a scaled-down version of the R/S 6000; there are

Scaled down and scaled up. I had the pleasure of listening to a lecture by
Rick Simpson of IBM's Watson labs. He worked on the 64-bit extensions to the
Power architecture. He said that Motorola (and to a lesser extent, Apple)
really drove IBM hard to remove the extra silicon needed by rarely used
instructions. (for example, the PPC can't do a mask of bits 3-28 as the
RS/6000 can) By reducing the number of complex instructions, the PPC is a
smaller, faster, less complex chip than the current RS/6000.

>opcodes in the R/S 6000 that are not in the Power PC chip, and according to

True. Mostly rarely used functions. (less than 1%) However the PPC supposedly
can emulate those functions. Mr. Simpson stated clearly that they are binary
compatable. (at least the 32-bit PPC)

>what I read somewhere (I can't recall where.), there are a few opcodes in
>the Power PC chip that are not in the R/S 6000.  Keep in mind that the

I would be interested in hearing more about this.
Are you thinking of the 64-bit extesions by chance?

/s Steve Fuller        sfuller@tamu.edu        Texas A&M's UNIX Helpdesk
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: clock speed & MIPS Motorola<->Intel?
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:14:27 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <Bw73vy.Lor@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ma3602@eehp14 (Michael J Alford) writes:

>A Mac IIci also beats it in price/performance ratio if you buy from Compaq or
>IBM.  Then again, who buys their PC from IBM?

Gosh, you mean IBM's new PC spinoff is out of business?
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM SUCKS!
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:40:04 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Oct12.073453.3052@tamsun.tamu.edu>, sfuller@tamsun.tamu.edu (Steve Fuller) writes:
> In article <6161.2ad576d0@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>>In article <FISCHER.92Oct6031152@steiner.iesd.auc.dk>, fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars Peter Fischer) writes:
>>> If IBM sucks, how come Apple is going to use their chips and is
>>> developing their new OS with 'em? Does this mean that 3 years from
>>> now, "Apple suck" will be true?
>>
>>* Apple isn't using IBM's chips. They are using Motorolas chips. Motorola is
> 
> Sorry Bill, You are wrong. The PowerPC 601 is an IBM. Motorola is licencing
> the architecture. The later models (603,604,620) will come from both. 

This is not what I heard from Apple at the developers conference. Apple isn't
using the IBM R6000 chips. They are using the Motorola chips recently
developed by the Apple/IBM/Motorola consortium. THe 601 isn't compatable
with the R6000. It has a similar architecture, but completely different
instructions. 

Indeed, they just generated first silicon in the last month. 

>>  basing their chips on IBM's architecture. In actuality, the PowerPC
>>  is a simplified version of the RISC 6000 architecture. And tons faster.

> pssst. The Power architecture (ie R/S 6000) is pure IBM.  

True, but the PowerPC 601 isn't an RS 6000. It is a completely new chip.

-- 
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: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:51:57 GMT
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <8rvzlln@rpi.edu>, johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman
Johnson) says:
>
>I agree. So where are the OS/2 2.0, WPS apps, eh?
>
Where were the Mac apps 1/2 year after the Mac was available ? In the meantime
we can use the old-fashioned Windows and OS/2 1.x apps.

>|> Yeah, but Finder isn't OOPS is it?  It's just a wanna be.
>
>I presume you mean "Object Oriented Psomething Ssomething", right?
>
>The finder isn't internally object oriented. It does behave
>object oriented anyway, but it doens't manage printers (still
>got that ikky chooser), and apps still split off into layers.
>
>Does pretty good other than that. Of course its still not officially
>"object oriented", but it doesn't seem to me that the internals matter
>so much. (or did you mean something else? It might help if you
>defined your acronym. Perhaps my responce  was totally irrelevant)
>
Perhaps he thinks more of how the UI works to the user, not to the programmer.
WPS sees the icons on the screen as objects i.e. things that have some
properties and can perform some actions. What actions an icon or a group of
selected icons can perform do you see by clicking on it with your mouse. What
properties it has you see in its settings notebook. And interaction between
icons is by drag/drop. The Mac OS has this partly but its not consequently
used. In System 6 you can`t print a document by dropping it on a printer icon.
Don`t know about System 7. But I`m pretty sure to format a floppy in System 7
you have to select the floppy icon and then hunt in the menu bar for a format
option. In OS/2 you click on the icon with your right mouse button and select
from the objects menu.

The difference is: in MacOS you ask the computer (i.e. menu bar) what can I do
with that object (and anything else I see on the screen). In OS/2 you ask the
object you want to manipulate "What can you do?"

That might not make a big difference to some users, but to me it sounds more
intuitive than the Mac approach. I`m happy with both, but I like WPS a bit
more.

Michael Bode.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Sorry (was Re: System 7.0 vs OS/2 and Windows NT)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:19:09 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <MepPG_a00WB2Bdemcs@andrew.cmu.edu> Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>they were only in response to Edward V Wright who based some of his
>arguments on incorrect assumptions and "facts" such as the "fact" that
>there is no standard sound form (while .wav files are exactly what he
>was talking about).  

Like, .wav don't play on *every* PC, you dig?  Only PCs with hardware
and software to play .wav files.  I said, show me a sound format that
you can play back on *any* PC.  Not "any PC that has some somewhere 
or hardware that fewer than 10% of all PCs have."

>He then suggested to Nan Zou that he (Nan) should
>learn some facts before arguing.

I'd suggest the same to you.

>I posted this apology in response to a few messages I recieved which
>said I was rude and obnoxious.  

And you don't read very well, either.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy