Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:4671 comp.sys.mac.system:7783 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu!rjc From: rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: De-macification of the Amiga (Re: The Amiga's Future) Message-ID: <1991Jun26.230459.19455@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Date: 26 Jun 91 23:04:59 GMT References: <1991Jun25.160016.10433@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991Jun26.200208.25581@zardoz.eng.ohio-state.edu> Sender: news@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu Organization: The Internet Lines: 59 In article <1991Jun26.200208.25581@zardoz.eng.ohio-state.edu> gaynor@agvax2.ag.ohio-state.edu writes: >In article <1991Jun25.160016.10433@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, rjc@churchy.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) writes: >>In article chuck@brain.uucp writes: >>>In article <43643@cup.portal.com>, morris-ng@cup.portal.com (Yuklung Morris Ng) writes: >>>> >>>> Oh, Amiga DOES NOT need a lot of desktop space compared to Mac, as we have >>>> screens, which a lot of Mac users still not quite understand... >>> >>>Well, that shows what a wonderfully intuitve box the Amiga is, doesn't it? >> >> No, I think it show the kind of intelligence the average Mac >>user has, and the kind of people the machine is targeted at. :) > >[explanation of Amiga "screens" deleted...] > >Well, I won't argue Amiga vs. Mac. I have an SE/30, my fiancee has an A500. >I've been spending more time on the A500 for the past few days, since we bought >Lemmings over the weekend. 8-D (How does one make an insane smiley?) > >But I don't think that the "screens" are very intuitive. Once you figure them >out, they're great - it's nice to have three layered screens, 2 dedicated to >full-screen apps, and the other dedicated to WorkBench and some windowing apps. I guess if you're used to the Mac it might be less obvious, but what's to figure out? If you start up an App that opens its own screen and you want to get back to workbench you just press the front/back gadgets at the top of the screen to flip screens. The same thing happens with windows that open to the full size of the screeen. If you want to see what's behind them you click on the gadget to send the screen to the back. >However, the screens aren't quite obvious. Clicking on the menu bar with the >left button and dragging it down to show the screen behind just isn't one of >those things that come to you - especially when there is no visual indicator to >show that there -is- a screen behind. Perhaps, with some kind of notifier that >there is a layered screen, it could be more intuitive. You don't have to drag screens, you just click on the front/back gadgets just like windows. What's the visual indicator on the Mac if a window opens and takes up the whole screen? How do you know there's something behind it? Common sense of course. >As for the "intelligence" shot, well, it was smileyed, so I won't bother >spouting the old-time Mac Religion. Save us both, eh? Layered screens aren't any less intuition than layered windows. For all intents and purposes Screens can be thought of as large full screen windows with child windows inside them. >--- >Jim Gaynor - AgVAX System Manager - Academic Computing - Ohio State University >VMS: UNIX: >Disclaimer : All opinions expressed here are mine and only mine. So there! >Witty Quote: "Shoot him now! Shoot him now!" - Daffy Duck, "Rabbit Seasonings" -- / INET:rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu * // The opinions expressed here do not \ | INET:r_cromwe@upr2.clu.net | \X/ in any way reflect the views of my self.| \ UUCP:uunet!tnc!m0023 * /