Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!caip!princeton!chiu
From: chiu@princeton.UUCP (Kenneth Chiu)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac,net.micro.amiga
Subject: Re: Easy of programming, Mac, Amiga
Message-ID: <1666@princeton.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Sep-86 11:57:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: princeto.1666
Posted: Wed Sep 24 11:57:43 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Sep-86 01:07:31 EDT
References: <1274@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <741@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> <397@gumby.WISC.EDU>
Reply-To: chiu@princeton.UUCP (Kenneth Chiu)
Organization: Princeton University Computer Science Department
Lines: 52
Xref: mnetor net.micro.mac:7204 net.micro.amiga:4839

In article <397@gumby.WISC.EDU> bezanson@gumby.WISC.EDU (Brian 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

Why is this necessarily a good thing?  I'm sure it makes the system routines more
complex, and it seems that the only changes you can make to a program's menus, etc.,
without recompiling are only cosmetic.  For example, can you add a new menu item
to a terminal emulator that turns handshaking on/off without recompiling?

>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.

There is a trade-off here between having all programs use the same interface, and
having more flexibility.  Perhaps Apple leaned toward the standardization side,
and perhaps Commodore leaned toward the flexibility side.  Regardless, the issue
is endlessly debatable, and certainly not so simple.

>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.

Have you ever used a Xerox Star, a Sun, or an Apollo?  Deciding how many buttons
to put on a mouse is another design issue that involves compromise, and no one
choice is obviously better.  If you have only few buttons, you are limited to what
actions can be initiated with only a button press.  This means that you must
necessarily have more mouse activity to perform a given action.  If you have 
many buttons, it can be difficult to remember what button does what.  BTW, the
right button is almost universal for pulling down, or popping up a menu, and
the left button is almost universal for making some kind of selection.

>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.

Taking any bets?  :-)



I have not done any programming on the Mac, so I have refrained from making any
specific comments about Amiga vs. Mac.  I believe that such discussions can be
useful and informative, but not if you are going to just say the Amiga is
better because of blah, blah, blah, or the Mac is better because blah, blah, blah.
The people who designed these things are not stupid, they certainly must have had
a lot of considerations in mind.
-- 
Kenneth Chiu                                              UUCP: princeton!chiu
Princeton University Computer Science Department        BITNET: 6031801@PUCC