HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: panlilio@acs.ucalgary.ca (Victor P. Panlilio)
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Summary: Even Old Macs are quite sprightly
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 03:58:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

In article <1993Jan19.173504.4385@athena.mit.edu> zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>In article <aggie-190193101048@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu> aggie@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu (I R A Aggie) writes:
>>
>>We have better things to do with our time than argue with amigaheads.
>>
>>James
>
>Yeah, we are too busy rebooting our Mac's after they crash..
>
>Eric

If you are *busy* rebooting your Mac, either you are jinxed, or
maybe you are doing all kinds of weird things to *your* system.

I use a 4-year old Mac II everyday (8MB RAM, 40MB internal hard
disk). Within the last few months, I've swapped out the original
8-bit card for a new Apple 8*24 (not GC) card, added the 32-bit
QuickDraw, and am running System 6.0.7. I have been connected to
an AppleShare server via PhoneNet since early 1991. I run about a
dozen or so INITs. I don't get my machine to hang, even tho I run
a fair assortment of programs (Word, Excel, Persuasion, FileMaker
Pro, Illustrator, PageMaker, and more recently, Adobe PhotoShop,
Adobe Premiere, Virtus Walkthrough, Pixar Typestry, Macromind
Director). I recently attached a 160MB Quantum hard drive in a
refurbished Jasmine 100 case. I keep my Mac II on 24 hours a day.
And I am now running QuickTime 1.5 on it, as well. But the fan is
just so noisy on my wheezing old machine!

Needless to say, I get a lot of useful work done on my Mac II,
which is more than I can say about PC's of the same vintage.

When the original NeXTcube came out, I was surprised by how SLOW
it seemed. Even the Turbos do not respond as quickly as a Quadra.
User interface responsiveness influences perceived speed A LOT.

I chuckle whenever I see the spinning disk icon on the NeXT
Turbo. I can't wait for the PA-RISC version of the hardware...

I also have occasional access to a Quadra 700 with 20MB RAM and a
400MB hard disk, and the main difference is that it runs System
7 and performs significantly faster than my old Mac II, and for
most of the tasks that I do, it seems "speedier" than a NeXT.

Oh, and about the Amiga...can you say IDE interface and AGA? If
Commodore had any sense, they would've put SCSI-2 in the 4000.

Just the opinion of a multiplatform sourgrape.

Victor 8^)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: myers@periwinkle.crayola.cs.psu.edu (Joseph F Myers)
Subject: MAC-IBM-AMIGA?
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 06:00:42 GMT

Something to think about for computer users of all types:

I have been a MAC user since 1986, I have owned 4 Macs begining with the 512k.  

I would like to say that the whole idea of a 'Mac Advocacy' group is wrong.

   *My computer is not a religion to me  and I don't feel the need to defen    d my computer.
      
   *I would buy WHICH EVER COMPUTER WOULD SUIT MY NEEDS BEST

*Macs have an elegant design, and a well thought out operating system. Thei r aplications are also very refined and powerfull. but  the price/performa nce ratio is not very good.

*Amigas are a bit sloppy in the operating system/user interface department, but with their custom graphics co-processors, they are ideal for animation and video overlay.

*PCs are bit complex, and can seem disorganized. There are many valid opera ting systems to choose from(OS/2,MS-DOS,WINDOWS-not a true os,NEXTSTEP,..e tc ). Software compatibility and configuration can also be a problem. On t he other hand a fast intel chip(486/66DX2) and local bus video is ideal fo r raytracing and rendering. The price/performance ratio is very good.


So, My point is, a MAC has served my needs well for many years, but I now want to do a lot of FAST raytracing. I have considered amigas, but I  will buy a 486/66DX2 NOT because it is 'better', but because it suits my current needs.

just remember, computers are there to HELP YOU, so choose the BEST one for your needs!
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: Masticating Illini, Urbana Illinois
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:40:59 GMT

jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle) writes:

> If the network was not going to start out large and heterogeneous, it 
> would SEEM TO ME that the wise move would be to use a small Appletalk
> LAN for the time being.  If you are really big into speed, add ethernet
> and use ethertalk.  When the network grows beyound this or you want to
> add PC's, etc, then Novell becomes more advantageous.

If all you have is Macs, Appletalk will be just fine.  The problem is the
physical connections.  Don't ever use Localtalk cabling, and I find it 
hard to recommend PhoneNet for more than a dozen or so machines.  Hell,
it annoys me just transferring files between our two macs at home.

If all you'll have is Macs, Appleshare and Appletalk will work just fine,
but if you can, run it over Ethernet.  Novell is probably better on a
cost/performance ratio (Macs _do_ cost more than DOS, and it's hard for
me to justify extra money for the Mac interface on a machine that's not
used interactively).  While it doesn't work beautifully with PC's
(we use AppleShare 2.0 with some PC clients, I don't know what the state
of affairs is with current versions, or if PC's are even supported anymore),
AppleShare will be much easier to setup and administrate.
-- 
Thomas Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  "Behind every argument is someone's ignorance." -- Louis D. Brandeis
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: vhs@qb.rhein-main.de (Volker Herminghaus-Shirai)
Subject: Re: Computer abbreviations
Reply-To: vhs@qb.rhein-main.de
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 20:42:51 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.092904.3610@lin.foa.se> eriks@lin.foa.se (Erik Svensson  
FOA2) writes:
> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:
> 
> 
> >Has anyone heard a better abbrivation than this for Macintosh?
> 
> >Makes Applications Crash If Not The Operating System Halted
> 
> >Any good ones for Win NT, or Microsoft?
> 
> Win NT = Not in Time (weak, I know).

Marketing Incredibly Crufty Retard Operating Systems for
Obsolete F***ing Terminals

--
Volker Herminghaus-Shirai (vhs@qb.rhein-main.de), NeXTmail welcome

Looks good on the outside, but -
	intel inside
From: sbb@panix.com (Steve Baumgarten)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
	<1juuphINN9fc@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>
	<1993Jan24.214840.18202@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:00:15 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.214840.18202@netcom.com> howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes:

   Gotta take exception here.  You can FTP *FREE* more and better SW for
   a Sun than you can currently buy for a Mac.  SunOS is run at almost
   every University campus, and hence, amost any UNIX SW will compile on
   a Sun.  For example, I just ported our companies product to SunOS in 3
   weeks, whereas the HP port took 1.5 months.  The product used 3 third
   party libs and has 802 *.c files.  SunOS is a good implementation of UNIX.

This is very silly.  I wish to run Quark XPress, or Word, or Excel
like every other Mac and Windows user.  I can do this while running
A/UX 3.0.  As Unixes go, A/UX is far from ideal.  However, it does
afford you this one fairly major advantage -- you can run Mac software
at the same time.

Exactly what free software can I FTP for my Sun that is even remotely
close to being as useful and full-featured as these packages?  Where
is it?

Discussing hardware capabilities in the absence of available software
(and including the price of this software) is pointless.  The vast
majority of computer users want to be able to use high quality
software that is relatively inexpensive, easy to use, and well-
integrated with all the other software they already own.

Unless I'm mistaken -- and please correct me if I'm wrong -- the
software available for Unix-based systems (including the NeXT) is
significantly more expensive than similar software available for the
Mac or Windows systems.  This can add significantly to the total
system price.

Of course, this is assuming that such software is available at all.
Frequently it is not, which is much more of a problem for most people
than the fact that they're not running Display Postscript or that
their computer isn't preemptively multitasking.

--
    Steve Baumgarten       |  "New York... when civilization falls apart,
    PANIX, New York, NY    |   remember, we were way ahead of you."
                           |  
    Email: sbb@panix.com   |                            - David Letterman
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: kocks@leland.Stanford.EDU (Peter Kocks)
Subject: Re: NeXTstep vs. Taligent
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 02:35:43 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.214055.18936@netcom.com>, garylang@netcom.com (Gary Lang) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan23.192322.8465@leland.Stanford.EDU> kocks@leland.Stanford.EDU (Peter Kocks) writes:
|> 
|> My understanding of what they are doing is that they have a C++ 
|> that is really just syntactic sugar around an objective-C like system.
|> That is, rather than rely on vtbls they translate to some form 
|> of runtime messge lookup system...somewhat like what I 
|> understand Component Software does. So, it's basically Objective-C
|> using foo->msg() rather than [ foo msg ] with all of the other
|> er, benefits of C++_ available.
|> 

Sounds good.  But, such a system is not part of the standard C++ language,
the arguments to message may still be strong cast, and none of this has
been seen by the general public yet.  It may work very well in the end,
but it may be some time before it is stable.  Obj_C is out and is
stable and has been for several years.  
--pk
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kelvin Leung)
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 22:30:25 GMT

holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Holcomb) writes:

>Can you run System 7.0+ and QuickTime and Adobe Photoshop, and get 8, 16, or
>24-bit color using your Mac emulation?  Or are you limited to MacPlus
>compatible programs?  My impression about all the Mac emulators I've read about
>is that you can, at best, emulate a MacPlus and you get the same dinky little
>screen for displaying the interface.  I find MacPluses to be mostly inadequate
>for doing any serious work on a Macintosh platform, partly because of the small
>screen size, partly because it is slow, and partly because System 7.0 is not
>available for the MacPlus.

I don't want to get into yet another Amiga vs Mac debate.  However, I would
like to say a few things.

Amiga+Amax doesn't really emulate a MacPlus... well... it really depends on
what equipment you have.  Also, you can have ~800x600 on a 14" if you have
the right model of Amiga.

Furthermore, System 7.0 (heck, even 7.1) is compatible with the MacPlus.  
Have you seen it running on a MacPlus??

>Dave Holcomb
>holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu

yours Sincerely,
Kelvin
e-mail: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu
From: dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Douglas Taylor)
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Summary: Times, they are a'changing! 
Keywords: Mac Whopper Whataburger 
Organization: Florida State University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 23:54:37 GMT

In article <C1FA9r.Mx2@csugrad.cs.vt.edu> holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Holcomb) writes:
>dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Douglas Taylor) writes:
>:  You know, at least the Amiga users bother to read the competition's mail be-
>: 	fore making stereotypical remarks; obviously, you cannot say the ame
>: 	about yourself.  And, as a side note, I can do everything I want on
>: 	my Amiga; from running Mac applications, to IBM applications, to Amiga
>: 	applications, all at the same time... thanks to EMPLANT, ATOnce Plus,
>: 	and, of course, CBM.
>: 
>
>Can you run System 7.0+ and QuickTime and Adobe Photoshop, and get 8, 16, or
>24-bit color using your Mac emulation?  Or are you limited to MacPlus
>compatible programs?  My impression about all the Mac emulators I've read about
>is that you can, at best, emulate a MacPlus and you get the same dinky little
>screen for displaying the interface.  I find MacPluses to be mostly inadequate
>for doing any serious work on a Macintosh platform, partly because of the small
>screen size, partly because it is slow, and partly because System 7.0 is not
>available for the MacPlus.
>
>Dave Holcomb
>holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
 
 Not being a total expert, with the EMPLANT we can run 8-bit color displays on 
	ECS and OCS (older model Amigas, that is); I am assured, although it
	doesn't always mean much, that the newer models (the AGA series) will
	run 24-bit color screens... As for Adobe Photoshop or QuickTime, I 
	unfortunately have not had access to these programs, and so have not
	been able to try them out on my machine, or any Amiga I have handy.
	Sorry about that...
 As for both AMAX-II and EMPLANT, they can run System 7.0+; in fact, earlier
	I installed the Russian System Software on my Amax... niiiiice.  But
	it seems strange that you say System 7.0 isn't available - the AMAX
	emulates a Mac Plus (128K ROMs and all), and it doesn't seem to 
	suffer a slow down at all..

 Oh, and for the record - the EMPLANT emulates/simulates a Mac IIci (?) I 
	believe, and the AMAX emulates a Mac Plus on steroids... the EMPLANT
	is color, and AMAX is Mac and White  :).
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 17:23:43 GMT

In article <1jpothINN8ak@shelley.u.washington.edu> jaesyn@carson.u.washington.edu (Jason Smith) writes:
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>
>>In article <1jl75mINN4a8@shelley.u.washington.edu> jaesyn@carson.u.washington.edu (Jason Smith) writes:
>
>>Ease of Use:
>
>>It is a matter of opinion which is easier to use, Mac or NeXT.  I still say
>>NeXT has a much more structured, consistent and powerful user interface.
>
>	True, a matter of opinion.  Having worked with Unix, the NeXT is an
>inuitive system.  But to someone who's never used Unix?  I think not.  NeXT's
>interface is still based off of it's Unix roots, and frankly, it takes a bit
>more technical knowledge to *understand* than the Mac.  I have to look at this
>from the point of view that complete dunderheads are going to be using them,
>I'm afraid.  Otherwise, yes, I might agree with you.  But, for the hypothetical
>idiots, the Mac is easier.

I really wish I could get rid of the true misconception that NeXTSTEP is
any harder to understand than MacOS.  Skimming thought the NeXT users manual
shows no sign of UNIX anything.  Everything from network setup to general use
is performed either automatcially, or through simple grapical configuration
programs.  Many large coorporations have switched to NeXTSTEP because of its
ease of use.  I have used Mac and NeXT, and quite simply the NeXT has a much
more simple file system and graphical interface.  The Mac filysystem has
files scattered everywhere.  If you have a bunch of hypothetical idiots working
at your site (your quote, not mine) wouldn't you be better off with the most
organized system?


>>>	
>>>Jason M Smith
>>>University of Washington
>>>Physics/Math
>>>
>
>	Thanks for the input, but the focus of this system is going to be at
>the *users*, not me, the admin.  The less trouble *they* have, the less trouble
>*I* have. :)  Hence, I'm aiming for the easiest to use system for complete
>novices... and it looks like the Mac to me.
>
>JMS
>

Well, I hope you would at least go somewhere to have a NeXT user give you
a demo of how NeXTSTEP can help you.  You are about to spend a lot of money
and it is worth your time.  Also, you were worried about support.  I can
almost guarantee than from whoever you buy your NeXTSTEP systems from, they
will come in and set everything up free of charge.  You will get the one
on one support from NeXT or from the NeXT reseller.

Eric


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu (Garance A. Drosehn)
Subject: Re: YA Mac horror story
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:31:20 GMT

cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Carl B Jabido) writes:
> Well, where should I start?

Oh, I don't know, how about by getting a clue?

> The stupid cluster people disabled cntrl-openapple-reset, so I had to
> turn it off and on.  No big deal, but why they did it is still beyond
> me.

Hmm.  Do you mean command-option-escape perhaps?  Or are you thinking that  
the magic key sequence used by PC's are also the magic key sequence used by  
every other machine on the planet?

> I go to chooser and find the right server.
> Log in, and now, all of a sudden, the system locks up.  No cute
> little watch cursor.  What's going on?  Oh, there it is, two small
> arrows up in the corner, a place not normally looked at.  Network access
> I guess.  Okay, I have my system again.

I suppose that when you don't know anything, then you don't know anything.   
People who use Macs certainly would be looking up in that corner when  
accessing a file off a network server.

> I double click on the new
> volume (very nice implementation!  In fact, that's what OS/2 does too). 

I'm glad OS/2 can *now* do what the Mac was doing six or seven years ago.   
Welcome to the 1980's, I'm glad you could join us.

> Okay, I traverse the server till I get to my class section.  Wow, Mac's
> built in network is slower than my NFS connection across the country;

This is a problem with your network (and I agree it can be a big annoyance).   
If the macs were set up with ethernet cards, which they certainly can be,  
you would have seen much much better performance.  If your university  
decides to skimp on their networking resources (or at least those for the  
Mac you are using), then don't blame the Mac.

> I ftp everything to my computer, so I can do my work on my system
> instead.  So, I ftp to my ftp server on my computer.  I transfer
> everything, again noting that transfer rates were only about 8k per
> second.  I attribute that to the Mac of course.

Nope, this is the same problem as noted above.  Your Mac is apparently setup  
to do MacTCP stuff via LocalTalk (instead of an ethernet card).  LocalTalk  
is slow no matter what kind of packets you are trying to send thru it.

--
Garance Alistair Drosehn     =     gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
ITS Systems Programmer            (handles NeXT-type mail)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;           Troy NY    USA
From: tjhendry@queen.mcs.drexel.edu (Jonathan Hendry)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
Date: 23 Jan 93 00:41:05 GMT
Organization: Drexel University, Dept. of Math. and Comp. Sci.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk) writes:
: In a message written on 19 Jan 1993 17:09:21 GMT, rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu 
: (Russ Taylor) writes:
: 
: >If NeXT is so much more godawful fast than a Mac (which it isn't) then 
: why
: is a 68030 Mac suitable for almost anything, while an 030 NeXT is so slow
: it got cancelled?  BTW, how fast are those 486s with NeXTstep going to 
: run
: DisplayPostcript?  Not very, I'd wager.
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: 
: I've use a couple nexts, and I wasn't very impressed.  The speed is 
: nothing compared to a Quadra because of the overhead of the NeXT os.  The 
: interface is annoying, as well as the two button mouse.  There is nowhere 
: near as much software as their is for the mac either.  Mac rules!
: /es
: 
: 
: ---
: jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk)
: The Draco Unix System [BBS]

Yep. That damned two button mouse. Every time I go to click, I need at least
three minutes to remember which button to push. Yup. It's especially complex
since I have them set (via Preferences.app) to be the SAME THING!.


I guess I'll have to buy a new NeXT, so that I can hang a mac adb mouse off the
keyboard, instead.

(I don't think so.)

<Note: This is coming from a former Mac-head. I have since found Nirvana.)

--
Jonathan W. Hendry
Drexel University College Of Information Studies
<set loose the marmosets!>
From: Jim.Matthews@dartmouth.edu (Jim Matthews)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXTstep for PowerPC --- THE ONLY CHOICE
Date: 28 Jan 93 14:47:27 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

Terrance Wilcox 229-3361 writes
> PowerOpen is a reworking of AIX. OS/2 is moving to a Mach kernel but  
won't
> be Unix. Mac OS and A/UX have a hazy future. 

Not so hazy: MacOS will still be the OS that most Macs run, but it will  
run on two flavors of microprocessor (680x0 and PowerPC), support 68020  
emulation on the PowerPC, and a microkernel will provide some new services  
(such as preemptive scheduling, memory protection, etc.) for applications  
and drivers that are revved to take advantage of them.  A/UX will merge  
with AIX to become Apple's version of PowerOpen: a Unix that runs MacOS  
binaries on everything from 68030 Macs to IBM RS/6000 workstations.

>Taligent (pink) is completely
> different from all of the previous OS's listed.

That's for sure, but it sounds like both Apple and IBM will try to  
incorporate bits of Taligent's work into their current OS's before the  
complete Taligent environment ships.

Jim Matthews
Dartmouth Software Development
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu (Yan Fang/Humanities)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center Student Mail Machine
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 22:08:04 GMT

In article <b#m3w6m@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib106.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>
>If the user can destroy his system without wishing to do so,
>that is a flaw.

If a driver can destroy his car without wishing to do so, that is a flaw.
Car manufacturers have a responsibility to their drivers not to let harm
come to them. In fact, if a driver kills himself by doing something not
officially supported by the manufacturer, like driving 120 mph in a blizzard
down a highway during rush hour blindfolded, steering the car with his feet,
then it is the manufacturer's responsibility because the driver wasn't
prevented from doing so by features of the car.

BTW, the surviving family of a drunk woman who drove her Porsche 75 mph
around a 35 mph curve sued Porsche in the '70s for selling a car that
encouraged people to drive fast. They won.

The moral of the story: I'd rather drive a Porsche than a padded cell.

>			- 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.


-- 
Yan Fang-Magnusson
Ph.D. candidate, philosophy, University of Utah
yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu
yanfang@cc.utah.edu (NeXTmail)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: kocks@leland.Stanford.EDU (Peter Kocks)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:49:42 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.211318.16382@netcom.com>, howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes:
|> This thread is GREAT!  All the arguments the Mac fanatics are using
|> against the NeXT are almost identical to the arguments MS-DOG fanatics
|> were using against me when I evangelized the Mac several years ago.
|> Keep it up, guys!!!
|> 

I've been laughing to myself about this as well.  The funniest one is when
Mac fanatics  (myself included) scream, "Yah, but look at all the apps 
available on the Mac".  I remember the same thing being said about DOS,
but then DOS did not have PageMaker.  I'm not sure NeXT really has a
market force like PageMaker was for the Mac, but maybe.

--pk
kocks@chemistry.stanford.edu