Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!mephisto!ncar!boulder!uswat!uswmrg2!steve From: steve@uswmrg2.UUCP (Steve Martin) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: Can't resize windows? (was Re: Windows 3.0 & the Mac) Message-ID: <1990Jul18.195357.18074@uswmrg2.UUCP> Date: 18 Jul 90 19:53:57 GMT References: <1990Jul10.022352.4138@bdmrrr.bdm.com> <3097@gmdzi.UUCP> <90195.153543Q8N@psuvm.psu.edu> <3114@gmdzi.UUCP> <4706.26a43afd@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> Reply-To: steve@uswmrg2.UUCP (Steve Martin) Distribution: comp Organization: US West Marketing Resources Group, Aurora CO. Lines: 22 In article barnett@crdgw1.ge.com writes: >Apple *knows* that a two-or-three button mouse provides a more efficient >user interface. (An Apple employee told me this.) > >The real problem is: > > Apple cannot radically change/improve the user interface > because the new interface will not be Mac-like. Whoa! Maybe one employee of Apple believes this, but I doubt that Apple would make the statement quite so boldly. I have used HP's two button mouse, Sun's three button mouse and Apple's one button mouse. The only time that I thought that the one button mouse was less efficient was after several bottles of beer. I shouldn't have driven a car at that point either! I was very proficient with the Sun mouse, I only had to check the manual for correct usage twice a day. I suppose that a 300 key keyboard would be more efficient, by the same line of reasoning. -- Steve Martin | Nothing I say can be held against U S West Marketing Resources Group | Me or my employer! (...uswat.uswest.com!uswmrg2!steve)