Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!usc!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!concertina!fiddler
From: fiddler@concertina.Sun.COM (Steve Hix)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Mac vs. Xerox (was Re: Amiga mentality cont'd)
Message-ID: <134346@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 12 Apr 90 00:59:17 GMT
References: <1342@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> <90098.170806JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu> <5562@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Lines: 54

In article <5562@sugar.hackercorp.com>, karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes:
> 
> Two.  Pop-up menus.  On the Xerox the menu popped up where the mouse was.
> On the Mac it pops up on top.  

The Mac interface isn't quite static...menus that popup, or can be "torn off"
to be placed wherever they're most convenient are supported now.  Hierarchical
menus, too (finally).

The menubar isn't all bad, since you aren't forced to look around to see where
a given application's menu is (or *which* application is active).  Lots of
neat ideas floating around all over the place, doubt if we'll see the "ultimate
GUI" for a long time yet.  (All over the place encompasses everyone playing with
GUI design, btw.)

> Three.  The Xerox had a three-button mouse and the buttons behaved consistently.
> The one-button mouse of the Mac was supposed to be an improvement, but that
> button has ended up having several multiplexed actions, one click, two clicks,
> three clicks, even five clicks for some programs.  I've tried dialing a phone
> with the switchhook for fun.  Quintuple-clicking reminds me of that.

This is a joke, right?  (I suppose anything's possible, though.  Sheesh.)

> Four.  Icons would change on the Xerox depending on what was going on.
> If you dropped something on the mailbox to send to someone, the mailbox icon
> would show something in it until it was delivered.  Now some stuff has
> appeared that does things like this on the Mac, but it was not in the original
> Mac GUI, hence "degraded."

Simplification isn't always synonymous with degradation.  I'll agree on some points,
disagree on others.

> And I can think of another machine's GUI that is a predecessor of the Mac
> that is better implemented than the Mac...  Yes, the Lisa.  Remember

No argument.  Lots of good ideas there...a lot of which will likely resurface
in the future, too.  (Lots of the original Lisa developers are still around
at Apple, with a lot of their original convictions.)

> And you guys are still paying the price for the corners that had to be cut
> in the original Mac to meet its target price, i.e. software shortcuts (no
> multitasking) to meet the original 64K ROM target, etc.

You have to charge alot to the vision of one individual who *really* wanted
an "appliance" for the masses.  And had enough clout to get away with a lot
of it.  Very little of his enforced restrictions were strictly based on
direct cost factors.

Pretty good points.

------------
"Up the airey mountain, down the rushy glen,
   we daren't go a-hunting for fear of little men..."
('cause Fish and Game has taken to hiring axe-carrying dwarves)