HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:19:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: rpi.t9x1y+c
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

In article E6n@news.cso.uiuc.edu, rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Ravikuma Venkateswar) writes:
>johnsd2@jec327.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>
[deletia- lots of stuff on sound driver]
>
>>Well, I didn't know about the checkbox. But what it proves is that
>>windows can be made to replay sounds on a standard speaker. The
>>difference is the need for extra software.
>
>>Remember that if Windows can count the extra stuff like that, so can
>>the Mac. It would get crazy fast, I think.
>
>But this isn't exactly extra software! It's like a bug fix since Microsoft
>published it and it's on the 'net for all Windows users. If you can't count
>that, you can't count the Apple System 7 tuneup or any other bug fixes
>that you download from the 'net.

I believe Apple is including that (and Quicktime too, for that matter)
with all new macs. (well they are going to 7.1- I have heard nasty
rumors that Apple isnt going to ship any macs that do not need it with 7.1,
but somehow I doubt it.)

So I can count it. If Apple didn't, I could not.


---
			- 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.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 15:25:32 GMT

In <#hz18dq@rpi.edu> johnsd2@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>In article 722183341@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>In <xly150p@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>[deletia- monitors]
>>
>>>[deletia- resedit]
>>>>>
>>>>>>Modifying resources can be done using the standard file system
>>>>>>interface. Just read that part of a program file, which contains
>>>>>>the resources and interpret it yourself.
>>>>
>>>>>But you need to interpret the format..
>>>>
>>>>True. Just like a compiler has to do it.
>>
>>>Doesn't the linker do that?
>>
>>No, on Windows the resource compiler does it. I.e. it generates
>>that format, and attaches the output to the executable, in
>>two separate steps. On Windows/NT, the linker implements the
>>second step, i.e. the attaching.

>Oh, ok- I thought you meant "a compiler" as in "a C compiler".

I meant it that way. The resource compiler is a compiler, not
a linker, if you use the common usage and definition of these
terms. It compiles a textual representation of a resource into
a binary representation. Unlike an ordinary language compiler,
it does a little bit of copying, too, but it doesn't do any
kind of linking, as far as I know.

>[deletia- resources]

>>>>>Its used for a lot more than that. Virtually anything you
>>>>>want can be stored there. Its very handy. Things like
>>>>>control definitions, color tables, all the strings in your
>>>>>program (officialy, you are supposed to do that), any internal
>>>>>data you want to keep there.
>>>>
>>>>There is a string table in the collection of the standard
>>>>Windows resource components, too, and its use is recommended,
>>>>likewise. It's of course part of the user interface.
>>
>>>Hmm? All strings are in the ui? Anyway, the point was just that
>>>you can (and do) put all sorts of rediculous things in there,
>>>just cuz it easier.
>>
>>The strings are ui business. The main purpose of the string
>>table is not to have any language dependency in the code, so that
>>you can translate your application into a foreign language
>>just by translating the resource script, and without looking
>>at the source code. A well written app not even has to be
>>recompiled to create a foreign version.

>I know about this.

>>But this string table should'nt be modified at runtime or (mis-)
>>used for other purposes, IMHO. 

>Why ever not? If its a handy place to stick some other strings, why
>not do so?

It just doesn't feel right. :-)

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
--
      o      (     Wolfgang Strobl    Wolfgang.Strobl@gmd.de (+49 2241) 14-2394
     /\        *   GMD - Gesellschaft fuer Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung mbH
   _`\ `_<===      Schloss Birlinghoven, P.O. Box 1316,  | #include   
__(_)/_(_)___.-._  D-5205 Sankt Augustin, Germany        | <std.disclaimer.hpp>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: robertk@rkrajewski.lotus.com (Robert Krajewski)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: Lotus Development Corporation
	<ROBERTK.92Nov20110002@rkrajewski.lotus.com>
	<1992Nov20.211934.52966@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 23 Nov 92 11:12:42

In article <1992Nov20.211934.52966@watson.ibm.com> arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew Southwick) writes:

   In <ROBERTK.92Nov20110002@rkrajewski.lotus.com> robertk@rkrajewski.lotus.com (Robert Krajewski) writes:

   >Floppies are indispensible to solve these problems.

   Problems, ah!  You PC users have problems, no?  Will the Mac crash due to
   a network card driver or requestor bug?  Much MUCH less likely, especially
   for those machines that have Ethernet built in.  I see your point of having
   a handy sneaker-net, though.  That is what floppies are good for.

Maybe I should have made the sarcasm more explicit.

The point is: floppies are often used to work around connectivity
deficiencies. Many times, they're just a Band-Aid, because a *real*
solution is too difficult.
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2724 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:2710
From: 925wardell@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:25:31 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <1ec7l2INN1th@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, an780@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Travis Grundke) writes:
> 
> In a previous article, gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) says:
> 
>>Mac zealots, like mmunson for exmaple, remind me of xian
>>fundementalists.  No matter what evidence you shove in front of their
>>face, they simply ignore it.  Go ahead Mark, enjoy your Mac.  It's a
>>toy computer, but hey, if you like it, then fine.  Just don't try to
>>change the world so that I have to suffer with your religion.
>>
>  Well maybe I joined this game a bit late and I don't know what you're
> talking about (and maybe Mr. Roston is correct, I don't know what the
> discussion is about), but the Macintosh is FAR superior especially if
> you're talking PeeCees vs. Macs. If the Mac is a "toy" computer, why the
> hell is everyone in PC-ville trying to copy its OS eh? As far as suffering
> with religions, we're already suffering the PC religion. Had Apple cloned
> the Macintosh in 1984, we'd see 1 zillion Macs instead of PCs just becase
> the Macintosh makes so much more sense. To quote Lee Iacoca: 
 > "Just because it makes SENSE."

	Oh right.  Everyone is going to a GUI.  Not everyone is copying
the Mac.  The Mac popularized the GUI which Apple did not invent.  
I can't think of very many things that Mac can do better than a PC but
I can think of many things PCs do better than Macs at a smaller price.
And I work with Macs a lot more than PCs.  
	The most expensive Quadra with System 7 still can't multitask
worth mentioning.  

						-Brad



Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 03:02:17 GMT

In article <Bxwx5G.E6n@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Ravikuma Venkateswar) writes:
>>>
>>>All this is of course a kludge. But, contrary to what you said
>>>earlier, it proves that even on PCs without a soundcard, Windows
>>>*can* replay sounds and isn't restricted to simple beeps. 
>>>
>
>>Well, I didn't know about the checkbox. But what it proves is that
>>windows can be made to replay sounds on a standard speaker. The
>>difference is the need for extra software.
>
>>Remember that if Windows can count the extra stuff like that, so can
>>the Mac. It would get crazy fast, I think.
>
>But this isn't exactly extra software! It's like a bug fix since Microsoft
>published it and it's on the 'net for all Windows users. If you can't count
>that, you can't count the Apple System 7 tuneup or any other bug fixes
>that you download from the 'net.
>
>
In fact, Microsoft initially released the speaker driver as part of one
of the Windows 3.1 beta builds last fall and removed it from general
distribution for reasons that are not completely clear to me (although I
suppose it had to do with wanting Windows to work as efficiently as
possible).  Hardly a 'bug fix.'

Joe
jmalloy@hamilton.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: How MS could annoy Apple
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 21 Nov 92 12:17:49 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <wfz1nrp@rpi.edu>  writes:

[ regarding the NeXT's Workspace Manager]

>It makes it too inconvinient to see 2 or more directories at once;
>its a fundamental flaw of the "list of files in a window, which
>can be made to "view" multiple directories" approach the NeXT does.
>Certainly the NeXT does it well, but I still find it clumsy+obnoxious.
>
>Just spoiled on the Finder I guess. :) Id rather use it that the Windows
>File Manager. The multi-pane  trick is neat.

Ah.  I understand, and will try to reply here.

The NeXT *does* allow you to see two directories at one time:  pull down  
two file viewers.  They work like the Mac's Finder windows in this regard.

I think that NeXT realised early-on that it had to consolodate the  
Workspace Managers' window system to avoid window-itis, like the Finder  
typically has. (You know, 30 windows open to get at the file you need).   
This was especially true on the NeXT since it very often will be running,  
in addition to the Workspace Managers' windows, 10 applications at one  
time (I've got 5 right now and that's low).  So NeXT designed a file  
controller that, as elegantly as could be done, allowed you to do all  
necessary file operations with a single window--hence the NeXT's "shelf".   
But this still wasn't as intuitive at start as the Finder's multiple  
window setup, so NeXT also allowed for multiple windows as well, though  
they are not the default.

NeXT didn't just come up with their design; they grew into it.  NeXTSTEP  
1.0 had windows very similar to the Finder.  But like the Finder, 1.0  
suffered from window-itis cluttering up the screen to the point of  
confusion.  This is a serious problem on a multitasking OS with a big file  
system like the NeXT.  So in 2.0 NeXTSTEP moved to its present workspace  
design.

The Finder is more intuitive, but it suffers when you get into large,  
highly hierarchial file systems.  You have to learn how to do  
option-opening of folders and command-clicking on the title bar of windows  
_very fast_.  The Finder was really designed for small systems with few  
subdirectories and volumes (like the 128K).  As the Mac moves further away  
from the simplicity of the 400K disk, I think the Finder's design will  
slowly prove less useful. Not that I doubt Apple will come out with an  
amazing replacement, though.  Aliases are a good step.


>>Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
>
>Like your quote, btw. ;) Strange but true.


Thanks.  :)

--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: eriks@lin.foa.se (Erik Svensson FOA2)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: FOA, Linkoping, Sweden
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:26:00 GMT

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

>> What I really can't understand is this passion for formating floppys in the 
>> background. Is that all people do the whole day long? Writing programs and 
>> formating floppys in the background? 
>> I, personally, don't use floppys all that much and when I do need them I 
>> usually can find one already formated. 
>> What are you guys doing with all those floppies you formatted in the 
>> background?

>"The point is moot sir."  Paraphrased from Jesse Jackson on SNL. . .

>You have not answered the question.  Nope, what you replied with can be
>called a cop out.  The fact is, Macs can't do it, to my knowledge and
>experience at least.

This was an observation, not an attempt to answer a question (I missed said 
question, anyway). I just couldn't understand why it's so bleeding important to
format floppies in the background (which the mac can't, or at least my macs 
can't). 

>BTW, I don't think it's much of a selling point anyway, so the "my OS
>can format in the background" argument is moot too :-)

My point exactly. I wouldn't base my purchase of a computer system on it's 
capability to format in the background.

--
Erik Svensson			Research Officer
Guided Weapons Division		National Defense Research Establishment (FOA)
Stockholm			Sweden

net.address: 	eriks@fenix.lin.foa.se

"Another casualty of applied meta-physics!" -- Hobbes
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: johnsd2@jec327.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec327.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 03:08:59 GMT

In article 721999698@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>In <b=w16xf@rpi.edu> johnsd2@vccsouth16.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>
>>In article 721932965@dhhalden.no, runehh@dhhalden.no (RUNE HALFDAN HOLST HUSEBY) writes:
>>>In article <00t1hlb@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec314.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>[deletia- metafiles]
>>>>>You don't, if you only need simple sounds. There is always the 
>>>>>speaker.
>>>>
>>>>Which can only beep under Windows, no? Or did windows pick up a driver
>>>>for the internal speaker that I dont know about?
>>>There is a driver for the internal speaker you don't know about. It's OK as 
>>>long as you don't need noise-free sound.
>
>>I understand from an email conversation that this driver disables
>>interrupts. This would mean you cant use it asyncrhonously (it
>>locks up your mouse). Kinda... cheesy.. no wonder MS didn't
>>include it.
>
>The Windows 3.1 driver for the internal speaker that I have installed
>on my machine (I got it from one of the collections of new or
>enhanced drivers which MS distributes via CompuServe or the
>networks) can be configured via the control panel. One of the
>options is a checkbox labeled "Enable interrupts during playback".
>If this box is checked, the sound becomes a bit noisy, but the
>mouse dosn't freeze during playback, if interrupts are enabled.
>
>All this is of course a kludge. But, contrary to what you said
>earlier, it proves that even on PCs without a soundcard, Windows
>*can* replay sounds and isn't restricted to simple beeps. 
>

Well, I didn't know about the checkbox. But what it proves is that
windows can be made to replay sounds on a standard speaker. The
difference is the need for extra software.

Remember that if Windows can count the extra stuff like that, so can
the Mac. It would get crazy fast, I think.
---
			- 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: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 92 03:30:28 GMT

Daniel M Silevitch writes:
> What are the chances that Apple will allow the sale of Mac clones
> without suing the makers? 
> 
About as good as the chances that Intel will allow the sale of 486  
and 586 clones without suing the makers.
--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 23:52:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.194001.3104@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>In article <1ec7l2INN1th@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> an780@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Travis Grundke) writes:
>>
>>discussion is about), but the Macintosh is FAR superior especially if
>>you're talking PeeCees vs. Macs. If the Mac is a "toy" computer, why the
>>hell is everyone in PC-ville trying to copy its OS eh? As far as suffering
>>with religions, we're already suffering the PC religion. Had Apple cloned
>>the Macintosh in 1984, we'd see 1 zillion Macs instead of PCs just becase
>>the Macintosh makes so much more sense. To quote Lee Iacoca: 
>>"Just because it makes SENSE."
>>-- 
>>Travis Grundke	 	    |  For More information about MacGames Digest,
>>Contributing Editor-       |  The First Publication Dedicated to Macintosh
>>MacGames Digest	    |  Gaming, Please contact us at the previous 
>    ^^^^^  ;)
>
>>an780@cleveland.freenet.Edu |  E-mail address. (c) 1992 Travis Grundke/MGD
>
>You know you're in trouble when you start citing Lee Iacocca as a
>computer expert!  i)
>
>Joe
>jmalloy@hamilton.edu
>

Touche' !!! :):):):)

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 15:45:10 -0500 
From: Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Workers hate windoze, revolution at 11! :-)

Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.os2.advocacy: 20-Nov-92 Re: Workers hate
windoze, r.. by Fred Bent@watmsg.uwaterl 
> I still cannot see what makes the MAC interface soo easy to use.  You
> simply use the Finder to open folders and start apps.  Same as in
> Windows, except that the desktop is always there. Each MAC app steals the
> main menu bar when it is active.  Windows each app has its own menu
> bar.  When you "minimize" a MAC app you have to use the silly icon on
> the right of the Bar to maximize it (make it active).  The desktop does
> not change.  In Windows the active app "jumps to the top of the desktop".
> Windows makes an icon for the minimized apps, MAC simply adds it to the
> menu of the apps that are running.

Yeah, but on the Mac, the file system is integrated with the Finder. 
That's a big thing.  Windows splits it up into Program Manager/File
Manager.  That really sucks.  (In fact, the reason why I'd rather go to
Mac instead of NT if OS/2 fails.)  About the menu bar, OLE 2.0 is going
to do that.  I find the Mac's way of the active app taking over the menu
bar is much better; it makes the system more document oriented.  About
the minimized icon behavior, I agree.  Mac's "hiding" of windows really
sucks.

Carl Jabido
cj00@cmu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman)
Subject: Re: CLI advantages (was Re: Macintosh bigots)
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 06:09:55 GMT

johnsd2@vccsouth16.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>
>Piping is notably absent from the Macs GUI. I generally find that
>I only use Pipes in Unix to do things that should not be necessary-
>pipe something to more or grep usually. I have seen uncountable
>numbers of complex pipes that do marvelous things (or dumb things,
>or whatnot)- IF you can remember 245 different commands with 3 letter
>names plus their switches. :)
>

You're not using pipes properly and/or your terminal environment is
shitty.

>>  With a GUI, however, you are entirely at the mercy of
>>the GUI designer, who has decided for you what tools you will use and
>>in what manner you can use them.
>
>This is only true if you strech "GUI designer" to mean "anyone
>who makes any component of your software". In this case,
>it applies to CLIs too.
>

All true. But! Most CLIs are extendable, most GUI's are not.

>
>I too have heard of Find; I know of no GUI which provides an exact
>equivalent. But this does not mean it cannot be done. The most
>difficult aspect of it is Finds ability to lanch annother app
>and have act based on the error code returned. I know of no
>mac find that can do this, but it can be done with apple events
>(which do return error codes)
>

Error codes? I don't understand. But you are correct, it *is* possible
to do find(1) with a GUI (depending upon your definition of a GUI).
After all visual programming languages exist and telling find(1) what
to find and what to do with it could be specified using a visual
programming language.
-- 
Andy Newman (andy@research.canon.oz.au)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: CLI advantages (was Re: Macintosh bigots)
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:23:53 GMT

In article: <GERRY.92Nov16122752@onion.cmu.edu> Gerry Roston writes:

GR> It seems that y'all are seeing the trees, but not the forest.  With a
GR> CLI, the user can basically do anything he wants.  If the exact
GR> tool isn't there, you hook two existing tools with a pipe or write a
GR> shell script.  With a GUI, however, you are entirely at the mercy of
GR> the GUI designer, who has decided for you what tools you will use and
GR> in what manner you can use them.  The GUI is quite sufficient for Joe
GR> Average User who never needs to push the system's envelope.  However,
GR> I defy any GUI user to show me how they would emulate the UNIX find
GR> command.  (Keep in mind find's options... that's what makes it such a
GR> wonderful utility and so hard to GUIate (new verb!))


Perhaps you should look at the Find command under System 7.0.  The list of
available filters can be increased without changing the format of the
utility, but the end user isn't required to look at the manual to figure
out how to use it.  

An exact copy of the UNIX find command's features could be simulated using
a single window under a GUI.  A drop down (or pop-up) list of available
filters could be used that would allow filtering options to be stacked
into a list window.  The user could then apply the filters to the 
selected volume or path and get another list showing the matching files
Further action could be performed on the files that appear on the matching
list (like deleting, copying, etc.).

I find that the current Finder's find command meets all of my usual needs.
The UNIX handling of files is so cumbersome, that utilities like 'find'
are necessary just to get simple things done.  Unfortunately, with the
UNIX find command, you'll spend most of your time just figuring out how
it works.  Even the UNIX manual concedes this:

(MAN-find)      find pathname-list expression
(MAN-find)      find pattern

(MAN-find)      [ dozens of -options deleted for space]

(MAN-find) BUGS
(MAN-find)      The first form's syntax is painful, and the second form's
(MAN-find)      exact semantics is confusing and can vary from site to site.
(MAN-find)
(MAN-find)      More than one -newer option does not work properly.

Comparing GUIs to CLIs using a Automatic vs Manual shifting example is
interesting but not very applicable.  Learning all of the options of a
UNIX CLI is more like learning the controls of the average nuclear 
control room.  Anything that would simplify this type of thing is
better since the end user can concentrate on the 'forest' and not
the 'trees.'

[MGM]



Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2767 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:2739