Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!rsfinn
From: rsfinn@athena.mit.edu (Russell S. Finn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: New Macintosh Strategy
Keywords: Macintosh
Message-ID: <1990Oct31.235530.7556@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 31 Oct 90 23:55:30 GMT
References: <306@cti1.UUCP> <272CAF47.16091@orion.oac.uci.edu> <2eBi026n031i01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Reply-To: rsfinn@athena.mit.edu (Russell S. Finn)
Distribution: na
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 35

In article <2eBi026n031i01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, kls30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Kent L Shephard) writes:
|> I have found that programming a Mac is harder than X11 or any other
|> environment I've been in.

You know, I hear this a lot, but personally, I've never found this to be the
case.  (For instance, I found programming the Amiga much harder than the Mac.) 
I've never programmed in Windows or X, but I've glanced through their reference
manuals, and my initial impression is not favorable.  In contrast, Inside
Macintosh usually seemed to make sense to me.  Perhaps I'm just twisted the
right way.

I guess I shouldn't complain -- if I'm really one of the two or three dozen
people in the world that actually *like* programming the Mac, and are good at
it, then I should be able to find plenty of work once everyone else goes off to
Windows or Motif or whatever.  (At Apple, if nowhere else.)  :-)

|> A Mac is generic 680x0 hardware.  There is nothing special, new,
|> inovative, spectacular about Mac hardware.  The software is what Apple
|> is charging you for.

Actually, if you want to see *real* generic 68000 hardware, open up an Atari ST
-- but I digress.  It's exactly the *software* in the Macintosh that makes me
want to buy one.

|> Apple is not trying to lower its prices.  If it was you would find them
|> doing something besides repackaging old harware in new cases and trying
|> to pass it off as a new product.

Huh?  You mean, re-engineering existing technology to make it cheaper to
manufacture, and passing the savings along to the consumer, isn't "trying to
lower prices"?  What does Apple have to do for you to call it "trying to lower
prices"?  [Not flaming, just confused.]

-- Russ
rsfinn@{athena,lcs}.mit.edu