Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!aurora!labrea!decwrl!pyramid!voder!kontron!optilink!cramer
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: The GNU Manifesto
Message-ID: <1848@optilink.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jan 88 16:39:18 GMT
References: <9591@tekecs.TEK.COM> <328@splut.UUCP> <3144@briar.Philips.Com>
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
Lines: 44

> 
> >> Minix is a very good thing.  The IBM-PC however, is worthless for anything
> >> except running "Flight-simulator".
> 
> >Smile when you say that...
> >Better yet, tell it to the literally millions of executives who are doing
> >useful work with them daily. They'll laugh you out of the office.
> 
> executives?  pc's?  useful work?
> 
> 			    paper weights
> 		       secretary running lotus
> 			  terminal emulation
> 		       secretary running lotus
> 	       impress business associates and friends
> 		       secretary running lotus
>       the hard disks are good for storing out of date software.
> 		       secretary running lotus
> 	      scream for more useful products like os/2
> 		       secretary running lotus
> 
> 
> rob

If this weren't typical of the elitist hostility to PCs on USENET (and a
few other places), I would ignore it.

LOTS of useful work is getting done out there by executives -- and I don't
mean the "secretary running lotus".  (The last place I worked, the General
Manager put his own spreadsheets together, his own presentation graphics
for corporate headquarters).

Finance used PCs for financial projections.  Personnel used PCs for word
processing.

Why this absurd claim that "useful work" isn't getting done on PCs?  Just
because it doesn't run UNIX?  Or is because some people don't know anything
about PCs, and to hide their ignorance, downplay it's usefulness.

I wouldn't develop a large project with multiple programmers on a single
PC -- I would use a multiuser UNIX system.  But I there are definitely
areas where the PC really shines -- word processing, for example.

Clayton E. Cramer