Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!nbires!hao!ames!styx!elxsi!fisher From: fisher@elxsi.UUCP (Chuck Fisher) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Mac vs. Amiga Message-ID: <241@elxsi.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Jan-87 10:43:20 EST Article-I.D.: elxsi.241 Posted: Thu Jan 22 10:43:20 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 22-Jan-87 22:42:11 EST Reply-To: fisher@elxsi.UUCP (Chuck Fisher) Distribution: comp Organization: ELXSI Super Computers, San Jose Lines: 73 Xref: mnetor comp.sys.amiga:1607 comp.sys.mac:900 The following is excerpted from an article in the January, 1987 issue of Dr. Dobbs Journal of Software Tools. "Macintosh Buttons and Amiga Gadgets" was written by Jan L. Hamington who is an assistant professor in the Computer Science Department at Bentley College. She is the author of "Macintosh Assembly Language: An Introduction. "This article explores the details of the standard Macintosh and Amiga user interfaces, examines the system routines programmers use to create those interfaces, and discusses those system routines through a pair of sample 68000 assembly-language programs that support a portion of the standard user interfaces. "It might be unfair to base an evaluation of the system routines of the Macintosh and Amiga simply on the subset of the routines designed to manipulate the user interface. On the other hand, the programming strategies used to implement the standard user interfaces are similar to those required for other system operations. In general, the Macintosh's routines isolate programmers from low-level tasks such as list manipulation and initialization of data structures (File Manager parameter blocks are notable exceptions). Although this reduces the burden on the programmer, it can decrease the programmer's flexibility. The Macintosh routines are also more complete in terms of their support for the documented user interface. The effect is again to reduce the burden placed on the programmer. "On the Amiga, the Intuition library provides routines for the standard user interface. Although support for screen, windows, menus, and fonts is available, there is a great gap in terms of text editing. In other words, the Amiga does not provide system routines to fully implement its own standard interface recommendations. As someone who writes more programs that rely on text manipulation than on graphics, I believe that this is a serious deficiency. It is true that the Amiga performs some functions "automatically" for which a Macintosh program must include code (for example, moving and sizing windows). Nonetheless, the Macintosh does include system routines to handle those functions." What Jan seems to be saying is that the Amiga has an advantage to programming graphics and animation oriented applications over the Macintosh. But for text oriented applications the Macintosh provides better support in terms of system library routines. This sort of reaffirms the idea of the Amiga being a great game machine while the Macintosh is targeted more towards "business" applications. Looking at the software available for each machine also confirms this orientation. The bottom line is that in choosing between a Macintosh, Amiga, or Atari one should look to see whether the applications available meets one's expectations. Flame on: Although Amiga touts its multi-tasking capability, how many programs are written to take advantge of it? I would agree that "background printing" is desireable, but a Mac can do that as well as an Amiga. Most of the work that I do on the Mac are interactive in nature, and don't lend themselves that well to true multitasking. Switcher and Servant provide most of the capabilities needed to integrate foreground tasks in my opinion. Much as I hate to say it, but the success of a machine is not based solely on hardware, or the elegance of the user interface. Instead, what guarantees success is the name and backing of the manufacturer plus the willingness of third-party developers to produce software. When enough machines have been sold and enough software written, the machine then becomes a "success" and continues to generate momentum for some time. The Mac has achieved this level in the past 12 months, but I am afraid the Atari and Amiga have not.