Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hpda!hpcuhc!hpsemc!gph
From: gph@hpsemc.HP.COM (Paul Houtz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: Re: Why Unix is good (was Re: Unix bigotry) LONG
Message-ID: <3200003@hpsemc.HP.COM>
Date: 2 Mar 89 23:53:57 GMT
References: <140@aucis.UUCP>
Organization: HP Technology Access Center, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 30

dph@lanl.gov (David Huelsbeck) writes:

>Mac's.  These experiences have led me to the conclusion that any system that
>lets you have a command line is better than any that doesn't.  

>I hear there's a pseudo-csh for the Mac now.  If the icons are so great
>why was this written?  

>Unlike social systems I think OSs are best measured by how well they treat
>the best users not the worst.  Sure any three year old can learn to use a
>Mac in a few minutes but the experienced user is stuck with that preschool
>interface for the rest of his life.  

    You make some very good points, David.  I agree with you for my
own use.   I can type 60 wpm, and I MUCH prefer a command line to an icon.

    However, you MUST not prescribe what works for you as being best 
for everyone else.  Icons have their place.  If I have to log onto a machine
I have never seen before (and may never see again) and gain some information
from it (like "How much money is in my checking account"), I prefer a menu.
There are times when I have been happy with icons and pull down windows in 
environments where I either had no documentation or had no time to read
the documentation.

    Please, remember that computers can be of tremendous help to ALL of
society, not just hackers.  Many different user interfaces are necessary
to allow different people to access the machine.

    Would you prefer a command line on the processor that controls the
electronic fuel injection and timing in your automobile?