Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.misc:10090 comp.windows.ms:10781 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!veritas!amdcad!brahms!phil From: phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.windows.ms Subject: Re: give me solid facts: why is the mac better than MeSsy DOS/WINDOWS Message-ID: <1991Mar26.011127.28302@amd.com> Date: 26 Mar 91 01:11:27 GMT References: <1991Mar22.050908.28727@nntp-server.caltech.edu> <1991Mar24.025913.29727@amd.com> <1991Mar24.065427.16198@nntp-server.caltech.edu> Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting) Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc; Sunnyvale, CA Lines: 85 In article <1991Mar24.065427.16198@nntp-server.caltech.edu> woody@nntp-server.caltech.edu (William Edward Woody) writes: |For the most part the Macintosh scores over MS Windows in this area, as far |as I can see. [I develop for both platforms, so I think I am more qualified |than someone who doesn't have experience on both platforms to make such |judgements.] The 'clipboard' on the Macintosh supports multiple formats, and |so an application who is getting information from the clipboard can in |theory pick and choose from the formats for something it supports well. |Under Windows it's a little more gross. I believe Wolfgang Strobel described the MSWin clipboard as follows: As I understand it, the paster puts a list of supported formats in the clipboard. The pastee picks the one he likes best and the paster then delivers the actual data. WS, any comments? | In other words, Microsoft doesn't set the standards; instead, it is |the market which determines the operating system standards. And through a |bit of guessing and luck, you may be able to reverse-engineer the standards and |(hopefully) keep future releases of the operating system from breaking. You seem to be reading into Letwin's quote the exact opposite of what I got out of it, unless you're the OS vendor (like Digital Research). MS is saying that if your application does something undocumented and it is popular enough in the market, MS will bend over backwards to support you. If you stick to the specs, then none of this is a problem. You don't have to "reverse-engineer the standards" unless you're writing your own DOS. I'd be inclined to call your reading malicious. | Now tell me which philosophy is going to create a more robust system |in the long run? As long as it works, I don't care what the philosophy behind it is. It may be ugly to you, but it's the results that count and I think my PC with Win3 works fine. MS is promising to me that if my application is used by enough people, they'll keep supporting it even if the app does some unclean things. I think I like that better than not being supported. | Remind me to tell you about the time I posted about how my brother, |on getting his new Macintosh IIsi, managed to put it together in about half- |an-hour, without any help or any computer training (he's a musician in a Believe it or not, I think the Mac has its place. I have even recommended to people that they buy a Mac. But I don't see that the Mac has any inherent long term advantage over the PC. I could open up a shop tomorrow and put together and sell PCs (or PS/2s) with Windows on them. The buyer wouldn't have to configure anything either. I could probably still do it for less than Macs cost. |start using a Macintosh right out of the box." My god, they _researched_ the |problem, and have been _analyzing_ the results, and _improving_ their products |from these experiments! It sounds so simple and obvious to do this for the |manual, or for the software, but for the box the computer comes in??? Good for them. But you know, people still buy PCs and PS/2s. | And when I watched my brother open the box and start assembling the |Macintosh I was almost in tears. I was _moved_ that the box was so well |engineered, so well put together, the proper manuals presenting themselves |as the box unfolded, that it was almost a crime to have to open it. Neat stuff. | And THAT is why I own a Macintosh, and THAT is why I believe that |for the end-user, the Macintosh is currently the only way to go, and THAT |is why I study the Apple manuals on Human Interface Guidelines, Documentation |Guidelines, C Programming Style Guidelines, C++ Programming Style Guidelines |and any other Apple guideline I can get my hands on RELIGIOUSLY. | | Because if I can help create a product which is even half as well |engineered as my brother's Macintosh IIsi, I could then finally die happy, |satisfied that I finally did something that was _right_. I appreciate how devoted you are to the Mac way, but your personal satisfaction doesn't mean that much to most computer buyers. -- Sun PC-NFS: for the engineer who really want a Sun and got a PC.