Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!mikel
From: mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: NeXT Limitations?
Message-ID: <46820@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 26 Nov 90 19:02:03 GMT
References: <61300046@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <61300047@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <25570@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 23

In article <25570@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> bb@reef.cis.ufl.edu (Brian Bartholomew) writes:
[ description of "Blast" INIT on the Mac]
>Again, I must complain about gross, hacky implementations of stupid
>PC-style tricks.  Remember that something as large as a multitasking
>windowed workstation should be built from seperate layers of software,
>not strung together with spagetti-style, OS-version-specific hacks.

The point of "Blast" is fun, not utility. It bothers me when people
cop an Attitude about what users Should Do with their machines. It
reminds me of a guy I met who resented the Mandelbrot set because
of all the CPU cycles that have been wasted computing it. I use and
program computers because it's fun! I bought my NeXT because I
intended to have fun with it. I write useful software for a living
because it's a fun way to make my living. Arguments about what
users Should Do carry absolutely no weight with me; users Should
Do what they want to do, and any restrictions on what they can do
just impoverish them. If people really want to create butt-ugly
windows for use in all applications, let them! Hey, it's their 
machine, right? 
  All this said, NeXT provides a smoother means for programmers to
customize interface elements for an application than does Apple. Now,
as for system-wide patches to, for example, change the appearance of all
windows, I don't yet know whether that is possible. I would like to
know, though.