From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: MAC Harddrive space
Date: 20 Dec 92 23:59:46 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <TOMSTER.92Dec15184036@bigwpi.WPI.EDU>, tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble) writes:
>>>>>> On 15 Dec 92 14:05:11 EDT, bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) said:
> 
>   BC> A lot of these sorts merely snap up every freely distributed
>   BC> application (and many that aren't freely distributed) and
>   BC> utility and drop them on their disk.  They rarely use these (if
>   BC> at all) utilities, but they at least have them.
> 
> I rarely use Norton Utilities.  Does that mean I should get rid of it?
> No, because when I need it, I really need it.  There are many programs
> like this.

Norton Utilities isn't freely distributed. It is commercial. If you didn't buy
the commercial package, I suggest that you do, indeed, get rid of it and go
out and buy a legitimate copy.

>   BC> Then, of course, there's the obligatory collection of nude .GIF
>   BC> files and whatnot. Of course, no IBM system would be complete
> 
> Why is this seen as more prevalent on IBM-compatibles than on Macs?
> My experience has been quite to the contrary.

I should say just the opposite. It is true, however, that .GIF files are
ubiquitious -- they don't prefer one platform over another.

> 
>   BC> without DOS, Windows, and OS/2 -- so there's three operating
>   BC> systems taking up space on the disk.
> 
> ???  Few people have all three.  

I know several people that have more than one. Nowadays, having both DOS
and Windows is practically manditory.

> How many people do you know who run
> all of those Mac OS's you keep touting (what ... os-9, MacMach or
> something like that ... plus System 7.1)?  Why do you think this is
> different on the other side of the Happy Mac-Land barbed-wire fence?

Very, very few Macs run any OS other than the Mac OS. Even A/UX is like
less than 1%.

>   BC> No, I think most IBM'ers don't really need 200 MB, they just
>   BC> think they do.  It's a sort of a "big car syndrome." They want
>   BC> to buy big disks so they can brag to their friends as to how
>   BC> much space they have -- then they feel inadequate because they
>   BC> only have 10MB of files on a 200MB disk.
> 
> Uh-huh.  Well, sure we do ... you sure are a great psychologist, Mr.
> Coleman.  :->

Well, it was just a theory. But my IBM'er friends do seem to have this 
problem, where as I'm perfectly content with far less disk space on my Macs.

> No, but you tell the truth; 200 Mb is not needed for *most* users.
> Joe-Average IBM will hardly be able to fill 200Mb without pirating
> everything in site or breaking his wallet.  For some, it is.

And this was exactly my point.

>> is that most of the Mac packages have a standard of about 80 megs or
>> so. Would 80 megs last a lot longer compared to an IBM system using
>> the same type of programs??
> 
>   BC> Since most Mac owners appear to USE their machines more than IBM
>   BC> users, I'd say yes, 80MB is more than adequate for most users.
> 
> Well, this first statement is false.  Mac users I know do not use
> their computers much at all, which is why it makes sense for them to
> use a Mac.  But even if it *were* true, how do you conclude that 80Mb
> is enough for most users if most users use their computer more than
> the guy who "needs" 200Mb?

Because the guy who "needs" 200MB is simply filling up his hard disk with
multiple copies of tons of software that he pirates. He spends all his time
configuring and re-configuring his system. He doesn't actually DO anything with
his computer.

>   BC> I bought a 105MB drive to replace my 40MB last year. I still
>   BC> haven't filled it, even though it contains stuff like a 20MB
>   BC> SoftPC hard drive file. When it does run short of space, you can
>   BC> be sure I'll dig in there and remove all the flotsam from the
>   BC> disk and be happy for quite a while.
> 
> Gee, sounds like me.  Bought a 105 from Quantum earlier this year.
> Have yet to really *fill* it.  I mean, right now it has only 6Megs
> free, but if I needed to put something else on there I could easily
> cut out a good ten megs without even getting to stuff I really need.

Me, too. (Except I have 16 MB free)

> I think the same basic phenominon appears with larger drives; they
> tend to get filled with "fluff", and their owners tend to just put off
> the disk-cleanning party for years on end.

Agreed. Kinda like having a 10,000 square foot house, and cleaning it 
once a year.

>> I realize that it's cheaper to buy harddrives from companies outside
>> of Apple, but then the quality becomes a concern.
> 
>   BC> I bought my 105MB from APS. I've been quite happy.
> 
>   BC> When you run out of space, that's the time to start shopping for
>   BC> a larger drive, not before.
> 
> I tend to disagree.  If you buy a small drive now, one which just
> barely fits everything you *know* you need, that money is pretty much
> gone.  When you find that you need more disk space you will be forced
> to trash the old drive (or sell it for next to nothing) and re-invest
> in a larger drive.  See?  You're out almost every penny you used to
> buy the first hard drive.

Perhaps you mis-read. If you don't know what your requirements on
disk space are, then there's no need to shop around for a "bigger" 
disk before your machine even arrives. That was my point.

> End story: buy what you need, plus a little bit.  Never get less than
> what you think you need, but not more than twice that ammount either.

Good guidelines.

>   BC> Go with the Mac.
> 
> No.  If you can, wait a while and see what happens with the newer
> systems coming out.  Now is a bad time to invest heavily in either
> architecture.  Of course, you can get some unbelievable deals right
> now, but a few years back you could get an incredible deal on a T.I.
> as well :->

Good advice.

> If you can't wait ... well, you have to think more about which you
> want to go with than just listenning to the Original Macintosh Bigot

Is he talking about me?

> ... and you probably could do better than taking just my advice as
> well.

-- 
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.