Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!CORY.BERKELEY.EDU!dillon
From: dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Easy of programming, Mac, Amiga.  The MAC<->AMIGA wars are on!
Message-ID: <8609240608.AA20322@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Wed, 24-Sep-86 02:08:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: cory.8609240608.AA20322
Posted: Wed Sep 24 02:08:21 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Sep-86 20:04:20 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 54

>Mr Bezanson writes:
>You missed the point here, you can graphically edit ALL the Macs resources
>(windows, dialogs, menus, icons, strings, etc...) without having to change
>any of the original programs code or need for any recompiling.  If I want to
>change/modify a Mac Menu, all I have to do is use a resource editor.  You
>have to recompile with the new code AND ORIGINAL SOURCE [Flame On: No wonder
>you need Multitasking, you have to do many things to make one change: Flame
>off]

	If you ignore the last line, he is essentially correct.  But then
again, it's only a small part of the big picture.  Of Course the MAC has
better development software out... it's had several years and 5 different
MAC versions to accumulate it over. 

>>The Amiga's disk interface is far faster than the MAC's.  That should say it
>>all.  There's very little in the DOS that requires byte boundary access
>>anyway.
>WRONG!!! Though the Amiga may be faster from a hardware DESIGN point, in 
>practical use, I could always go to sleep waiting for it to read in a disk, and
>I could watch ROOTS in the time it took to open up it's 'folders'.  The Amiga
>OS, at least from Intuition/Finder Section was defintely slower than on the
>Mac 512E or Plus.

	The floppies on the MAC+ are faster than the floppies on the Amiga.
Why, I don't know.  However, the Amiga beats out all previous versions of
the MAC, I think.

>The Mac is far easier to use, because Apple created a standard interface that
>99% of all Mac programs follow.  You can use nearly any mac program, to some
>basic extent, without ever having read the documentation.  I hate the 2 button
>mouse on the Amiga.  One minute you use the right button to open a window, the
>next you have to use another button.  It has less functionality than the Mac
>Mouse.

	The MAC interface is not that much different than the Amiga's.  I
think the usefulness of either is in the eye of the beholder.  Most MAC
users would prefer the MAC interface; Most Amiga users would prefer the
Amiga interface.

>The Amiga is a great piece of hardware, but it was brought out by an ailing
>firm that is still on the edges of financial disaster, and the Amiga is not
>helping Commodore out a lot.  The Atari ST for it's price and software has the
>Amiga beat out, and the Mac edges out the Atari in the higher end market.
>The Amiga has probably seen it's last days as a viable computer, due to price
>drops in Atari and Apple lines, and the introduction of Apples //GS.
>
>Time is a telling factor.  Let's have a net re-union next year and see if
>the Amiga is still sold by Commodore (or anyone else).  Commodores low-end
>market is falling to the big boys.

	We shall see.  From experience, small ventures by people who care
usually turn out to be quite a bit better then large ventures by big companies.

					-Matt