Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!RELAY.NSWC.NAVY.MIL!dsill
From: dsill@RELAY.NSWC.NAVY.MIL
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Amiga (was: Contents of windows)
Message-ID: <8905021703.AA14171@expo.lcs.mit.edu>
Date: 2 May 89 17:08:57 GMT
References: <8078@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 16

This is great.  I'm really enjoying sitting here and reading
everyone's opinions about the correctness of the decisions made by the
designers of the Amiga.  Of course everyone has 20/20 hindsight.  I'm
sure some of these decisions are questionable when viewed in the light
of the Amiga as an X client/server, but that probably wasn't even in
the *back* of their minds at the time.  The fact that a 512k machine
even *can* be both an X server and client *simultaneously* is
impressive, and that 512k is the minimum any Amiga has.

Can we move on to the next topic please?

================================================================
"The ultimate metric that I would like to propose for user
friendliness is quite simple: if this system were a person, how long
would it take before you punched it in the nose?"
					-- Tom Carey