Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!uunet!brunix!cs.brown.edu!cs012116
From: cs012116@cs.brown.edu (Mike Perkowitz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: Why even use Windows x.xx?
Message-ID: <72602@brunix.UUCP>
Date: 18 Apr 91 18:09:22 GMT
References: <10960@uwm.edu> <1077@hrshcx.csd.harris.com> <11003@uwm.edu> <1991Apr13.235447.16349@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Sender: news@brunix.UUCP
Organization: Brown Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 17


Actually, I find advantages to both command-line- and GUI- oriented systems.
With whatever little batch files, synonyms, command-shells, etc., DOS can work
quite well (though, of course, you have to be able and willing to set it up
to your liking). But I have also found the MAC interface to work extremely well
also. MAC gives you access, through the GUI, to everything you could do, quickly
and easily. The problem I have with Windows is not that it's a GUI but that it doesn't seem to be a very good one. Actually, it's an alright shell for running
applications (and games), but it's useless as an "operating system". You don't have quick and easy access to file manipulation (or even seeing what/where your files are). You have to run SOMETHING ELSE (i.e. the file manager), which is less of an oppressive-looking and running GUI than the program manager. On a mac, everything is the same sort of object - all of your documents, data files, and applications are right there, in the same place, in the same folder/window or whatever. In Windows, the things you






 execute are here, the things you load are there, and so on. The person who compared Windows to blinders had it right - it's
unsuccessful because it's (relatively) limited and inflexible.

(This wasn't meant to become a diatribe... i really do use windows for some things. I just don't expect it to be an operating system.)


Mike Perkowitz
cs012116@cs.brown.edu
ST801627 at BROWNVM     (bitnet - less temporary than the above)