HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Douglas Taylor)
Subject: Mac User group Needed...
Organization: Florida State University
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 03:57:19 GMT

 I figure this is the best place...

	Could someone be so kind as to e-mail the phone number and address of
	the Boston Mac user Group?   Or,even better, of ANY user group that
	has the Developer's CD-ROM of the international Mac systems?  I am
	attempting to install the Russian system 7.0.1, and it constantly asks
	me for UTILITIES (actually, transliterated, utilitys) - which, as any
	one who looks at bric-a-brac.apple.com can attest, is not in the
	archive...

	And a word of advice - although the Micro Computer Support groups are
	nice at certain Florida institutions, they know nothing about how
	Macs run System 7.0.1; they told me it required a special ROM...

--- 
/==========================================================================\
| L. Douglas Taylor | dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu |  A Cynic Seeking Hope  |
|-------------------------------------------------|     and Redemption.    |
| It is not the burdens of today that drive a man |                        |
| to madness, but the regrets of yeserday, and    | May Joy and Innocence  |
| the fear of tomorrow - so let us live this life |       Prevail...       |
| laughing more, crying less - savoring the days! |                        |
\==========================================================================/
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: 20 Jan 93 16:34:40 GMT
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:22:05 GMT

In article <0sJsXB2w165w@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca> jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk) writes:
>In a message written on 20 Jan 93 16:34:40 GMT, 
>johnsd2@jec315.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>
>If you have a reason to think otherwise, lets have it. But
>just insulting Amigaheads isn't very nice.
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>I have to agree.  That message was written late at night when I was in a 
>relitively bad mood.  I apoligize to all the Amiga USERS who read that 
>message.
>

What about the Amiga users that didn't read that message? What about us
poor souls that can't afford an Amiga, but wouldn't mind one? :) :)

Terry Wilcox



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac (Again) was "Need to convince boss..."
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 08:11:09 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.154614.24012@pellns.alleg.edu> smytonj@murr11.alleg.edu (Jim Smyton) writes:
>
>Great. Now I know NextSTEP 3.0 is cool.  I used it today, and aside from a  
>new folder look and a funky preference file that screwed up my docks, I  
>did not see any big advantage over 2.x.  For the an office worker, which  
>is what this thread was originally about, these changes will probably not  
>mean squat.  Tell me when an 040 NeXT running Mach and NextSTEP will run  
>at the same speed as an 030 Mac running 7.1 and I will be slightly  
>interested in getting off the cases of the people who keep saying NeXT is  
>better than Mac.

An 040 NeXT will run at the same speed as an 030 Mac running 7.1 when
the NeXT only has 8 Meg and opens FrameMaker 3.0. :)

>
>Tell me when NeXT will put out hardware that is compatible with anything  
>else.  The monitors use different scan rates, the printers use the  
>computer's PostScript, and this whole hooking up to a Mac network thing is  
>bupkis.  Sure the Mac sees the NeXT as another Mac, but wouldn't it be  
>nice if through all this, there was some kind of compatibility between the  
>machines?

When's Apple coming out with a PC-compatible computer? I know you can
hook up a Mac to a PC network, but wouldn't it be nice if through all
this, there was some kind of compatibility between the machines?

>
>One thing the NeXT does do better than the Mac...The little spinning disk,  
>that I see so much of, looks much better than the watch, on the Mac, which  
>I see so little of! 

Let's use the age old argument: DOS on a 486 is incredibly faster than
System 7.X on any Mac. So what? Does faster automatically translate to
better? If it did, why buy a Mac when a DOS box is faster? Of all people,
Mac users should understand that the cost of quality is speed. Does
anybody claim that 7.0 was faster than 6.0? No, 7.0 has more features.
Does everybody use every one of those features? No, but they're still
important. NeXTSTEP 3.0 is the same. It's overflowing with features
that not everybody uses, but they're important in the evolution of the
OS. Sure NeXT could strip out features and make the OS faster, but at
what cost? Why not keep the features and make the hardware faster?

The 680X0 isn't powerful enough anymore. Modern OS's need better hardware.
If the Mac was fast enough, the PowerPC wouldn't have been started. If the
Mac OS was good enough, Pink never would have been started. Apple's moving on,
even if Mac users think the Mac is good enough. NeXT is advancing too.
It's pushing the software to new heights without waiting for the hardware
to catch up. When the hardware catches up (HP maybe), the software will
shine.

Terry Wilcox



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:39:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.065620.18127@msc.cornell.edu> maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
>
>I've tried them. So what?
>X windows resources suck. Limited power, horrible to edit (ResEdit is much
>nicer), clustered all over the place in special files when they should be
>part of a resource fork.
>Widgets and gadgets suck. Use up way too much memory. SLOW!!!! Stupid
>programming model that tries to emulate C++ in C.

X is a big processor hog, I agree.  I wasn't trying to defend X.  I
was making the point that Sys7 isn't the end-all of GUI's and not the
best.  I also said it's adequate.  For the mac, it's good.  And it
blows WinDoze away.  

>How about getting sound out of X-Windows?
>Ever tried writing X code that handles 24bit images? On my mac I can code
>in one color model that works on all displays. On X I get a choice of 5
>color models.
>And what about this fun system of pallette lack of management.
>OS/2 Windows fares no better in most respects.

Different vendors have different tools for X.  Some are better than others.
OS/2 sucks.  

>Maybe you mean NeXT is better than Mac in these regards---can't say. But
>your implied claim that most UNIX environments are better for programmin
>than Mac is ludicrous. Maybe they're better for character based apps, but
>not for graphical/sound apps.
>

Check out the SGI GUI, Sun's Solaris, and NeXTStep.  They all provide
development packages that are the equivalent of the best stuff for the
mac or better, as far as GUI stuff goes.  And they blow the mac away
-- 
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Howard Berkey                                   	   howard@netcom.com
		  You will not find excess in the jungle
... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...    ... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 04:08:22 GMT

andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes
[very good explination of the NeXT video deleted]
>Do you see what I'm getting at?  DPS and NeXTSTEP are much, much more
>advanced than QuickDraw and Macintosh.  Indeed, NeXTSTEP is much more
>advanced than Macintosh in just about every single aspect.  That's why
>Apple is trying to copy NeXT with their Pink/Taligent stuff.
The NeXT is indeed what seems to be the insperation for Pink/Taligent.
Minor correction. While Pink is Apple's brainchild, Taligent is a mix of
Mac OS, OS/2, A/UX, and AIX and is as much due to IBM's efforts as Apple's.
In fact the co-op is going so well that the Taligent OS prototype 
{PowerOpen} is a year ahead of secedule(sp). 
"PowerOpen(AU/X 4.0): Rumor is that this could be the OS for IBM's PowerPC 601 
 due out in early 1993 [Apple's PowerPC 601 is not due out until Jan 1994.]  
 {Supports the theory of Apple planning to be both a hardware and software 
 company.}" From mac & ibm info {on sumex as mac-ibm-compare.txt}
Unless something goes very wrong the NeXT will go to a RISC processor within
a year to keep pace with the PowerPC chips.  QuickDraw QX and Carasel(sp)
{Adobe's PS viewer} will close the gap between the NeXT and Mac.
The NeXT is in many ways like the Mac was pre 1987.  Is still remains
to be seen if the NeXT go the way of the Mac or the way of the Amiga.
A major player or a nitch machine.

"Nothing can go wrong." Statement of Delos' Westworld
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@lib102.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Reply-To: johnsd2@lib102.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:36:41 GMT

In article 24669@athena.mit.edu, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>In article <FXaoXB2w165w@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca> jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk) writes:
>>In a message written on Wed, 20 Jan 1993 00:26:50 GMT, 
>>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes :
>>
>>WHY do the new Mac server machines run AU/X INSTEAD of MacOS????  Because
>>MacOS is not even powerful enough to handle simple tasks such as file 
>>serving and network support.
>>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>
>>I think it is you who needs to chekc your logic/reasoning.  Let's face 
>>it, have you ever worked on a NeXT?  I'm beginnin to think not by your 
>>stupid comments.  The next machne is sluggish compared to a Quadra in 
>>most cases.  It is true that in alot of OS cases etc. the NeXT behaves 
>>like an 030 IIci.  The MacOS interface is also a hell of a lot better 
>>than that cheap welfare interface Jobs ships with the NeXT computer!  The 
>
>Cheap welfare interface?  Very intelligent statement.
>

I know you're defending your computer from an absurd attack, but...

>>MacOS isn't pre-emptive multitasking, I'll admit that, but it's comming 
>>up!  But with all of thsoe things you said about Mac, it was still better 
>
>If they were to make the MacOS pre-emptive, all the current software would
>have to be rewritten to accomodate it.  You will never ever ever see 
>pre-emptive multitasking on a Macintosh.

That's no reason to spew absurd stuff yourself. Apple is planning on
adding this stuff (they are working on it); their plan for compatibility
is simple: Apps not writen for it will not get the benefits. They will
not be blocked from any memory, will not be pre-empted, etc. So rewrites
WILL be necessary to get the benefits, BUT old apps will work too. Not too
bad.

>>than PCs, becuase the only "OK" current multitasker now on the PC 
>>platform is OS/2, forget about windows.  I don't see next capturing a 
>>large share of the marketplace anytime soon, and they don't deserve to.
>>
>
>It is not next, it is NeXT.

The NeXT is not on the PC platform (he meant IBM PC Clone, I think).

Yet.
---
			- 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: tjhendry@queen.mcs.drexel.edu (Jonathan Hendry)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 24 Jan 93 17:24:18 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Drexel University, Dept. of Math. and Comp. Sci.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
: At some of the prices people are throwing around, you can expand your
: horizons.  HP has some workstations in those price ranges that will blow
: the socks off NeXT and Macintosh for speed.
: 
: $5000 is also around what you can get a complete Sparc for from Sun.
: 
: --Tim Smith

But then you also get Sun's OS.

HP and NeXT are having talks which may result in NeXTSTEP being ported for
the HP Snakes.

--
Jonathan W. Hendry
Drexel University College Of Information Studies
Anderson Financial Systems "Programmer-in-Exile" :)
hendryjw@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu (No NEXTMail :( )
<set loose the marmosets!>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:38:23 GMT

In article <C1Gy8z.F0H@cuug.ab.ca> wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
>In article <FXaoXB2w165w@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca> jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk) writes:
>
>>[...blah blah next blah blah mac blah NeXT, not next you dork blah
>>blah my mac beats a 486 blah blah blah...] deleted
>
>Why is it that incoherent name calling always pops up in advocacy groups?

Because they are ADVOCACY groups! (DUHHH!!!  :-) :-)

>Oddly enough, it's always the same people. Didn't this guy just insult
>Amiga users around the world?
>

He probably lives in America, where there are no more Amiga users.

(Just jokin! [but how's that hardware support, guys?  d;)] )


>Let's face it. Anybody can say 'my machine is better than yours', but
>intelligent people will come up with intelligent reasons. 

I dunno, I've seen Ph.D's get in 'mine's better' arguments...

>							    The more
>you flame and insult, the less respect people have for your opinion.
>

Ha!

Look man, opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all
stink.  If you beleive that you can genuinely influence people's true opinions
on the net, try reading alt.politics.clinton or talk.abortion for a while.

What are these groups for?

POINTLESS ARGUMENTS, of course!

-H-
-- 
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Howard Berkey						   howard@netcom.com
		"I AM the Lizard Queen" - Lisa Simpson
... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...    ... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...
From: ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Grumblings about Mac performance
Date: 24 Jan 93 23:31:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc.ibhan.727918304

In <1juscuINN8qf@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:


>Even though I program on Macs, etc.  I have one gripe:  Macs are becoming
>sluggish in the performance arena.  Intel is routinely making chips that
>are twice to three times as fast as the ones in the Quadra line.  Unless
>the PPC 601 comes out soon, the '586+ (I hate calling it Pentium, reminds
>me of a radioactive element :-) will become the standard because of its
>speed and Microsoft's NT marketing.

The PPC 601 is out in sampling quantities.  It will be in Macs by January
1994.  In IBM's by late 93.

>I do like Motorola's line of processors.  They are not as wierd as Intel ones,
>and work very reliably.  I just do not like seeing the fastest Mac Apple
>sells for about $10,000 being outran by a $5000 tower, or even a
>$2500 486/66.

I've never seen a 950 for $10,000.  $7000, maybe.

>Please correct me if I am wrong, but the PPC and the 060 will not be released
>until 1994.  By this time, Intel will have the 586 firmly entrenched
>and debugged.  Ugh.

As I said before, the 601 is out in small quantities.  I expect it should
easily be able to compete with the Pentium.  Fortunately for Apple, I hear
that the Pentium has some heat problems right now.
-- 
******************************************************************************
Ishir Bhan               * "Every day they take one more set away...."
ibhan@husc.harvard.edu   *                   -The Cure, "Forever"
******************************************************************************
Organization: Sophomore, H&SS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 13:26:14 -0500 
From: Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w

Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.advocacy: 21-Jan-93 Re: Need to
convince boss 4.. by Eric M Hermanson@athena. 
>OS/2??  Wrong.  NeXTSTEP is fully compliant with many standards:  Postscript,
>TCP/IP, POSIX, unix sendmail, Appletalk, Novell, UNIX, built in FAX, Ethernet,
> 
>FTP, DOS and Mac filesystem support, TIFF, EPS, RTF, 3270 emulation, JPEG,
>SybaseOracle databases, High sierra CD-ROM.  All of these things come bundled
>with NeXTSTEP.  NeXTSTEP 486 will also support Windows and DOS programs to
>run side by side with NeXTSTEP windows.

I think he meant the ability to run Dos and Windows programs all at the
same time, without crashing or major slowdown.  NeXTstep 486 may be able
to do that, but it's not out yet.  For most purposes, NS486 will
probably be overkill, especially once you consider price.  OS/2 is here
now, for less than NS486 will be.  For Unix support, come back in late
summer sometime.  IBM is supposed to release a Beta of OS/2 2.x Mach
then.  That's right, it'll use the same Mach kernal that NextStep uses
now.

> file serving, and the like for under $6000 (list).  NeXTSTEP 486 will also
> run on the new Pentium chips (586), so if you really really need speed,
> buy a Pentium chip and get NeXTSTEP to run on it.  If you need things now,
> Settle for a 66Mhz 486/DX2 running NeXTSTEP 486.  This configuration is 
> even faster than the current NeXT systems (unless of course you take
advantage

My only problem with this is that NeXTStep 486 isn't released yet. 
While you can get the Beta, the official release isn't till Q3, from
what I've heard.

BTW, I'm not saying NS486 is a bad thing.  I'll probably move to it when
it comes out.  Right now, I only have a 386/40, so the beta isn't much
of a choice yet.
From: szatrows@gandalf.rutgers.edu (John Kheit)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac (Again) was "Need to convince boss..."
Date: 22 Jan 93 18:19:55 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Another really nice thing in 3.0 (other than the cool color interface that has managed to stay nice and clean) is the 3D kit and renderman.  And a net of NeXTs can do some really nice rendering work.

later, John
(Former Mac Owner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac (Again) was "Need to convince boss..."
From: ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:08:11 GMT

In <C1GC2L.KJz@cuug.ab.ca> wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:


>When's Apple coming out with a PC-compatible computer? I know you can
>hook up a Mac to a PC network, but wouldn't it be nice if through all
>this, there was some kind of compatibility between the machines?

Apple already makes at least one PC-comptable printer (PLW NTX).

-- 
******************************************************************************
Ishir Bhan               * "Every day they take one more set away...."
ibhan@husc.harvard.edu   *                   -The Cure, "Forever"
******************************************************************************
From: ctm@ardi.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC, MAC or Amiga?
Date: 24 Jan 93 00:07:53 GMT
Organization: ARDI

Dear Folks,

Just a clarification on Rob Wyatt's recent post:

First of all, we'll be releasing a new version of Executor shortly and
will have a better catalogue of what runs, how well and what doesn't and
why.  Most ISVs that we talk to are now taking us sufficiently seriously
to send us software to test (in fact, we're a little backlogged in the
testing department now that things are flowing freely), so one of our
previous major impediments to listing what runs and doesn't (lack of
software to test) is on its way out.

Second, as far as I know, Quorum still hasn't released their emulator
for *any* platform.  Last year, at NeXTWORLD Expo, where we were demoing
the *shipping* Executor 1.0, Quorum was having a press release that said
they'd have their emulator out by June.  June came around and they claimed
December.  December came and went without release; I don't know what their
current claims are.  We always get beat up when compared to Quorum's emulator,
until someone suddenly realizes, WAIT! I bet ARDI too has an emulator
that runs everything that's not quite ready to be released...

Third, although we intend to have Executor running under NeXTSTEP 486,
emulators are a special case.  The vast majority of NeXTSTEP developers need
do little more than recompile to get their apps running under NS486.
However, because we make use of the internal 68040, it is necessary for
us (and will be necessary for Quorum) to have a synthetic CPU in order
for Executor to run under NS486.  Furthermore, the CPU will have to be
pretty slick to provide good performance.  That is certainly our goal, and
we should be able to demonstrate success at NeXTWORLD Expo in May, *but*
when it comes to Mac emulators, don't blithely assume that they're portable
beasts.

	--Cliff[ord T. Matthews]
	ctm@ardi.com

	as usual, direct questions to "questions@ardi.com"
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (M.Eaton)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:21:17 CST

In article <C18w8M.HK6@cuug.ab.ca>
wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
 
>
>In article <1993Jan17.190441.9736@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>
>>
>>If you're just starting out with computer equipment, buy Macintosh
>>hardware.  If you already have a considerable investment in MS-DOS
>>software, then get 486's and DOS/Windows, OS/2, or Windows NT.  If you
>>want a neat machine and you don't feel a need to worry about it
>>becoming obsolete (this isn't a worry in some cases), then try
>>NextStep 486.
>
>If you're buying 486's, why not run NeXTSTEP 486? If you don't like it,
>put DOS/Windows on instead. Why would your NS486 machine become obsolete
>when the same machine running DOS/Windows wouldn't? They're the same
>hardware.
>
Are you kidding?!?! Have you really got a thousand bucks laying around
to _try_ some hack OS that you're not sure will run your apps? Or
should we all trust you that we have to have this thing?
 
 
>
>Terry Wilcox
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark Eaton                    |
UC525655@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU |             Eat at Joe's.
                              |
From: mike@pencom.com (Mike Heath)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:33:57 GMT
Reply-To: mike@pencom.com
Organization: Pencom Software

Daniel Norman Johnson writes
>In article 1342@yvax.byu.edu, feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke) writes:
>>In article <aggie-220193173415@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu>  writes:
>>>I wasn't clear
>>>enough, though. What I meant is: How many app's actually use the second
>>>mouse button for SOMETHING other than bringing up the app's menu? As far
>>>as I know, only one, the commercial X application by Pencom [?Pensoft?].
>>
>>NeXT uses it for nothing but the pull-down menu.  Software makers (other  
>>than Pencom et al, who have a use for it) are heavily advised against using  
>>it for anything custom.  That's what we in the computer world call  
>>"consistency".
>
>Consistency, what's that? :)
>
>And who's this Pencom? What do they do with it?

Pencom Software is a UNIX software house.  We have a product for the NeXT,
co-Xist, that is an X11R5 server.  We use the mouse like X does.  Not only are  
both buttons independent of each other, but pressing both simultaneously (with  
a small fudge factor) simulates the middle button of a three button mouse.

Pencom Software is a division of Pencom Systems, Inc., a technical recruiting  
and contract programming company specializing in Open Systems.

--
Mike Heath		Pencom ...  We're not just headhunters anymore.
Pencom Software		
Austin, TX		
mike@pencom.com		NeXTMail accepted
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy