Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.hardware:11384 comp.sys.mac.system:5903
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!keith
From: keith@Apple.COM (Keith Rollin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: A Classic Dead End?
Keywords: Classic,System 7.0
Message-ID: <53169@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 21 May 91 20:05:36 GMT
References: <24530@oolong.la.locus.com> <53050@apple.Apple.COM> <28625@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 72

In article <28625@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> dth@reef.cis.ufl.edu (David Hightower) writes:
>In article <53050@apple.Apple.COM> bc@Apple.COM (bill coderre) writes:
>
>>Apple continues to provide the longest useful product lifespans of
>>personal computer makers, and some of the most reasonable upgrade
>>programs. This fact is inarguable.
>>
>>bill coderre
>
>This is a ridiculous statement if ever I've heard one.
>
>Granted, the 128, 512, 512e, and plus are still viable.  So are the
>8088 and 8086 (for that matter, I'll bet the old altair and TRS-80
>systems are still viable).  It all depends on what your definition of
>"viable" is.
>
>Further, the reason other personal computers may not seem to have as
>long a lifespan is due to one reason:  COMPETITION.  The 8088 was the
>machine to have, until Intel created the 286.  The 286 6MHz begat the
>10MHz begat the 12MHZ, and all was good--until Harrison and others
>created the 16MHZ and 20MHZ 286.  Then all was good until the 386 came
>out, and a new speed war started.  Tune in tomorrow for the next
>exciting episode.
>
>The point here is that Apple has stagnated by stomping on all
>competition.  If you compare the advances made on the IBM-side of the
>house as compared to the Apple side, this is obvious.

Oh, yeah? Let me know when the IBM side of the house releases anything
closely resembling System 7.0. And I don't just mean something that's
got overlapping windows; I mean everything that contributes to
useability.

You know, consistancy across applications seems to be something that PC
programs still haven't figured out. I was watching a fried of mine use
Turbo C++ the other day. He was editing a file, and I noticed a
flashing underscore under one of his characters. This was the insertion
point. However, there was some sort of block character over on the
right, too. I asked him what that was, and he told me it was the
mouse's cursor.  A block character??? For the mouse cursor? Well, I
guess you got to take what you can get in a text based system.

Anyway, he started moving the mouse around and showing me what he
could do with it. He clicked elsewhere in his text, and the 
insertion point (that flashing underscore) moved to where he
clicked. Then he double-clicked, and the whole line was selected.
"Hmmm." I said. "Let's try that again." So we did. Sure enough,
double clicking selected a whole line; there was no way to simply
select single words other than by clicking and dragging out the
selection. Now, I don't expect everything in PC-land to work the
same way as the Macintosh, but simple shortcuts for selecting
word-sized chunks should be available...

My friend then mused to himself "I wonder wonder how I can delete
this word?" Being a Mac user, he selected the word and pressed
Delete. Surprise! Pressing Delete deletes the character to the
RIGHT of the selection. The selection itself is unaffected! This
reminded me of a demo one of our Product Managers put together,
where he delights in showing the three different ways three
different MicroSoft programs implement the Delete key. One
program deletes the selection, one deletes the character to the
left of the selection, and the third deletes the last character
of the selection.

You call that progress on the IBM side of the house???

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Rollin  ---  Apple Computer, Inc. 
INTERNET: keith@apple.com
    UUCP: {decwrl, hoptoad, nsc, sun, amdahl}!apple!keith
"But where the senses fail us, reason must step in."  - Galileo