Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!kth!draken!d88-jwa
From: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Macintosh and IBM systems
Message-ID: <1184@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 13 Jun 89 16:38:46 GMT
References: <4063@merlin.usc.edu> <8YYSCqy00XcLM29HtU@andrew.cmu.edu> <23681@srcsip.UUCP>
Reply-To: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 22

In article <23681@srcsip.UUCP> rogers@falcon.UUCP (Brynn Rogers) writes:

>I prefer assembly language on a 680x0 to a 80x86 (I know both).
>I prefer a IBM clone to a Mac. (cheaper, more software, cheaper software,
>more hardware, cheaper hardware, unlimited different system configurations)

I use both at home (Well, actually I'm more keen on the mac, but...) and
have to say something: Try to buy N pieces of hardware for the PC clone,
and M pieces of software. Put them all together. Run them all together
at the same time (using MS DOS 4.0 - the closest to MultiFinder they have
gotten so far) (Also, this is no easy task with only 640 kb and no VM...)

How long before it all comes tumbling down ? System halted in under 5
minutes, is my guess. The Mac software and hardware interface, as well as
systems flexibility, makes the mac beat the hell out of any PC clone.

Who cares about money anyway ? :-)

-- 
 __       Jon W{tte (The dread Smiley Shark) email:h+@nada.kth.se
/  \      (+46 (0) 8 258 268)
   /---   (c) 1989 Yessbox Allright Professional Products Inc. - Y.A.P.P.I.
  /       -- No More --