Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!orchid!clyde!rutgers!lll-lcc!lll-crg!hoptoad!farren
From: farren@hoptoad.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: IBM's new System 2 Personal Computers
Message-ID: <1990@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: Wed, 15-Apr-87 01:34:51 EST
Article-I.D.: hoptoad.1990
Posted: Wed Apr 15 01:34:51 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 18-Apr-87 00:17:56 EST
References: <775@oliveb.UUCP> <1579@bnrmtv.UUCP> <1339@uwmacc.UUCP> <1414@sphinx.uchicago.edu> <194@eli.UUCP> <10987@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU>
Reply-To: farren@hoptoad.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Distribution: na
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 22

In article <10987@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> rhsu@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (Robert Hsu) writes:
>A nicer OS?  I take it you mean Unix, and not Messy-DOS.  Anyway,
>what's wrong with the Mac's OS?  It's flexible, it's powerful, and
>it's certainly easy to use.

Powerful?  You must be kidding.  Seems just a little more powerful than
MS-DOS to me, and that ain't powerful!

>Really?  The Mac II runs Unix also, and, as you probably know, the
>whole Macintosh line was designed for easy desktop publishing.  

The Mac II *MAY* run Unix at some unspecified time in the future.  It doesn't
do so NOW.  Also, desktop publishing was an application developed long after
the Mac was, not the other way around.  Please note that current activity
in desktop publishing is concentrating on the IBM-compatible line, NOT the
Apple machines.

-- 
----------------
                 "... if the church put in half the time on covetousness
Mike Farren      that it does on lust, this would be a better world ..."
hoptoad!farren       Garrison Keillor, "Lake Wobegon Days"