Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Path: utzoo!utstat!philip
From: philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough)
Subject: Re: Woz giveth, Scully taketh away
Message-ID: <1990Oct5.054914.25906@utstat.uucp>
Summary:LONG REPLY 
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 90 05:49:14 GMT
References: <186@alchemy.UUCP>
Organization: Statistics, U. of Toronto

In article <186@alchemy.UUCP> bbs@alchemy.UUCP (BBS Administration) writes:
>In article <1990Oct4.171048.21481@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes:
>>In article <184@alchemy.UUCP> bbs@alchemy.UUCP (BBS Administration) writes:
>>>First off, let me state that I really enjoyed reading the various replies
>>>to my article. Rather than receiving flames, I've learned a great deal and
>>>am pleased with the overall outcome. Now, off to quoting things and replying
>>>to these comments...
>
>>Well let me say I have not enjoyed this whole train, and I really don't think
>>the net is the place for peoples' little experiments of this nature.
>
>Look pal, if that's the way you feel, why not employ the "kill" feature of
>your news reader -- or are you the only person who pays for this network
>feed. I was curious about why people thought they way they did about the
>Mac, so I asked a question. Needless to say, I've had a variety of
>responses, many by mail, most very informative. Yours was the first to
>attack me in my attempt to obtain information. I didn't consider it a
>"little experiment" but a valid question that others might find interesting
>as well.

I am quite capable of killing a topic. It is simply that your approach to
obtaining information strikes me as very odd indeed. It would help if you
were a bit sensitive to the current feelings of many AppleII() users. Even
a rock could see that many people on the net are somewhat upset. I'm glad
you've learned a great deal. You could have done this by simply reading
this newsgroup for a few days.

[stuff re training and the Mac deleted]

>Well, when I once worked for a government research laboratory, I noticed
>how people had a difficult time learning how to use programs that ran on
>their PC and MS-DOS. I finally got them to purchase a few Macs and
>suddenly those people never asked me any more questions about how to
>make things work. When a new secretary arrived, I spent about two days
>explaining things compared with about a week and constantly answering
>questions on an almost daily basis when using a DOS machine.

Well I'm glad you recognize that we should all be buying Macs in order to
ease the task of typing memos,etc...What a great way to spend $10k! I also
work for a research insitution and we assume people are capable of picking
up skills which demand a certain amount of learning ability. An example is
trying to type technical documents on a Mac. You can take the easy way out
and use an equation editor( there is no WYSIWYG mathematical wp. on the
Mac-yet). You then find that it takes very little time to learn how to use
them and great you have a productive person UNTIL you have to produce a
long document and you must resort to Textures. Suddonly you are out of the
point and click world and you must explain to someone why the Mac has
become hostile after you've been assuring them that it was idiot proof. I
indicated that the Mac was very good at doing things which did not demand
any work of substance. Once you need to you're back in the real world.

>Maybe since I read Mac magazines and not DOS magazines I haven't heard
>the conflicting reports on how Mac users "produce documents which are less
>rigorous in their logical foundation" but I find that hard to believe. So,
>I move from a DOS machine to a Mac and suddenly my IQ drops; please!

I read both Mac and DOS magazines. I suggest you inform yourself concerning
the particular study, which was a published scientific article and not
one of your Peat Marwick specials.

>And finally, it's not really the menuing system that I'm saying is so
>great because you could use ProSEL for the II, and all kinds of things
>for other machines, but I'm talking about how nice it is to do the
>simple things: like format a disk, copy files, find things, navigate
>directory structures, simple networking. These are the kinds of things 
>the Mac makes easier, not just launching a program because it's an icon.

I indicated that I was talking about file i/o as well as launching. There
is a price to be paid for the straightjacket imposed by the Mac. And you
have selected an excellent example. Lack of file redirection,etc...Try
reading some of the Mac and Unix newsgroups to find out how hard it is
to capture a Postscript file on the Mac, then download it to a Unix 
system and print it out on a LW attached to the system. And yes I am
aware of Macps, command-F,etc...mypagesetup. 

I agree with you on the networking issue. Appletalk is rather nice.

>>Would also please note that Windows3.0 , OS/2, NeXTStep, OpenLook,etc...do not
>>give you ONLY a GUI. They provide for a CLI. In my opinion, this is a serious
>>weakness in the Mac OS( and GS/OS).

>Yes, in your opinion. In my opinion, because I am a programmer too, I
>like to have a CLI as well. But ask the majority of people in business
>whether they care about it and I think both your opinion and my opinion
>are in the minority.

You are underestimating business people, and the people going into that
one area of life. If our opinion was so off you would not find the vast
majority of users sticking to DOS. The basic issues involve speed( which
a GUI will hinder), the fact that only a few applications are needed 
(except in the Mac world where Peat MarWick studies glorify the benefits
of using more applications) and in reality only time will tell. It does
appear` as though a GUI is becoming more popular but people still want
a CLI. I suggest you look up some marketshare figures and see just how
your beloved GUI only computer is doing in the corporate world.

>[I talked about how myself and many others moved from the II to the Mac]

So I have moved from a Mac to a GS.

>>It's hardly surprising your friend has moved on to the Mac, given that he's
>>now a Mac consultant- no doubt setting up Appletalk networks, teaching
>>Pagemaker,Illustrator,etc...One can't really take these things seriously. It
>>always amazes me the money people pay out to "consultants" who come in and
>>hook up an Appletalk net for them using phonenet.
>
>Hmmmm. Well, I guess I'm a bit JEALOUS of his job too. I sometimes work
>for him or just hang out with him when he goes on a job, and it IS
>laughable what he gets paid to do. He's not a CS major or a graduate,
>and just likes to play with Macs. Yet, I went to college and work hard
>while he makes upwards of $85 and hour. Outrageous. But to say that it
>cannot be taken seriously is ludicrous. There is a market, and he fills
>it. Regardless of how stupid it is, or how much he gets paid for doing
>so little is not the point.

Well let me assure you I am not JEALOUS of someone setting up networks
and teaching Pagemaker,etc...I am doing what I like and I have all the
freedom I want. There are markets for all kinds of ridiculous activities.
They are eventually seen for the shallow and worthless activities that
they are. Had you told me your friend was using his computer to help
solve environmental issues I would be more receptive. It is the blatant
materialistic view that underlies your statement that I find offensive.

>>It may be of interest to you, since we are in the process of describing our
>>friends' computer preferences, that most of the really good programmers
>>where I work, who were enthusiastic when the Mac first came out, have ALL
>>abandoned the Mac. They have moved on to platforms which are more powerful
>>and easier to program.
>
>Yeah, well I have too. I found the documentation of Inside Macintosh
>to be overwhelming and writing even the simplest of programs is a
>major ordeal when compared to other operating environments. Like they
>say, there's something like a year or two learning curve to get up to
>speed on the Mac, and I don't have the time to invest right now. I've
>decided to stick with something I know and C/Unix works just dandy for
>me now.

Well I guess we can agree on something.

>Has anyone ever explained to you what a smiley means?             

Nope. I guess you just have.

>And as for "days of nonesense" I have written but three articles (this
>being the third) all with the same "Subject:" which could have been
>killed if you were more proficient with your news reader. And suggesting
>that I limit myself to my friends when I want to know more about
>something is ridiculous -- what is the USENET for -- people who want
>nothing but press releases? Where does curiosity come in?

I've noted that your articles have been provocative and insensitive to
many people who feel that the rush to jump on the latest technological
in thing( which appears to be where you are coming from) is destroying
years of investment of time, energy,money,etc...

I happen not to share the opinion that Apple is trying to do in the GS,
but others do. Moreover, it's not as if people have another vendor to
turn to. ONLY Apple makes the GS. ONLY Apple makes the Mac. I suspect
that people will be very reluctant to tie themselves to a proprietary
company should their worst anticipations come through. And I think that
is the bottom line. A propietary company does have certain "moral
obligations" towards those users who put their trust in such a company.
Apple has never let me down and I've stayed with them for most of my
non-Unix computing needs. I suspect that even my attitude would change
were they to simply pull the rug under GS users.

As for your question as to my problem. It's quite simple. I don't have
one. I simply found your approach insensitive.


Philip McDunnough
Professor of Statistics
University of Toronto -> philip@utstat.toronto.edu
[my opinions]