Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mcnc!gatech!ncar!unmvax!uokmax!news From: brett@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu (Brett Morrow) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: Apple Computer wins ruling against 'Windows' Message-ID: <1991Mar15.185425.23156@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> Date: 15 Mar 91 18:54:25 GMT References: <46873@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <1991Mar15.101202.1@csc.anu.edu.au> <1468@vtserf.cc.vt.edu> Sender: news@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Nets) Distribution: usa Organization: University Computing Services Lines: 107 In article <1468@vtserf.cc.vt.edu> cohill@vtserf.cc.vt.edu (Andrew M. Cohill) writes: >In article <1991Mar15.101202.1@csc.anu.edu.au> pfr654@csc.anu.edu.au writes: >>> Apple Computer wins ruling against 'Windows' >> >>GO APPLE!!! >> >>I always was suspicious of Windows. I am hoping for a final ruling something >>like that of the Polaroid vs Kodak suit, where the poor suckers who have >>bought Windows to try to turn their miserable PCs into Macs are left out in >>the cold :-) > >I dunno. We just got a couple copies of Windows here, because there are >many more DOS users on campus than Mac users, and Windows is a joke. >The 3.0 seems to have been deliberately designed not to look and work >like the Mac interface, and everything seems awkward and clumsy. The >windowing model is just plain stupid and confusing--some windows will >only open inside of other windows, while other kinds of windows, with >exactly the same appearance, can be moved anywhere on the screen. Lots >of other dumb junk abounds.... > >I am sure Windows seems great to people who have had trouble with the >simplisticly complicated DOS interface, but compared to any other >windowing system (Mac, Motif, NeXT....) it is still just a toy. > >So why is it "successful"? I think it has to do more with the >applications that are just now becoming available, that do offer some of >the functionality of Mac apps, but we had all that stuff six years ago. >Windows is a kluge. The Mac is not. One hell of a difference, in my >opinion, and I still wonder why Apple should even care. As long as they >keep pushing the Mac, Microsoft will never catch up. Compitition in the future. Microsoft is making major headway in Windows development. They really are not trying to match apple that would be fullish (and make the same mistakes apple has). They are developing what they need in terms of a DOS windows environment. In the dos world the command line interpreter still remain supreme. I wish I could get one for the Mac instead of the klugy windows interface that I am forced to use. At least in the DOS world I have a choice. > >In one of the trade rags (back page of InfoWorld, I think), the point >was made that Windows apps will never achieve the same level of >functionality that Mac apps have because a Windows developer cannot >count on a consistent set of hardware features--any Mac developer knows >that every Mac user has high-res graphics, built-in networking, great >sound output( and now sound input), and the same kind of processor >(functionally, the 68000 differs little from the '030, unlike the '286 >and the '386). Pity the poor DOS developer who actually has to worry if >his or her Window app will run properly on a dinky '286 machine with >an old mono display, no network, and no sound; *and* also work properly >on a high end 386 with XGA color running Novell and a bunch of wierd >high end hardware kluges to speed the software up. > In the Mac world there really are just as many problems as the PC world. If you look for instance at the readme file for MWORD 4.0D. All the fixes are for new hardware. Also, If they are the same and no developers have to worry, why does apple have to keep making versions of the operating systems to only work on the new machines. Also, I am running a Mac IIsi and there sure are a lot of programs that have problems with the hardware and configuration of this machine. Developers for mac still have to worry about compatibilty as developers for DOS. And if you had good software that used the advanced features fo the 68030 they you would have to worry about that too. In the DOS world they try to push for good fast software, not slower, safer software of the MAC World. >Windows and Mac--it's no contest, Apple...... > > >-- >| ...we have to look for routes of power our teachers never >| imagined, or were encouraged to avoid. T. Pynchon >| >|Andy Cohill cohill@vtserf.cc.vt.edu VPI&SU > I still hold to statement IBM or APPLE which is best? Well depends on what you want to do. Mac and IBM both have there good and bad point. I like MAC and I like IBM. I get productive work done on both and I have recomended both computers to people. The windows is not a replacement for the MAC but an extention of DOS to make some IBM applications better. A MAC is no replacement for WINDOWS. They both do a good job and they both have there uses. these are just my views. Brett Morrow -------------------------------------------------------- Internet: Brett@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu Bitnet Brett@uokucsvx