Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!d75!awdprime!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron
From: ron@woan.austin.ibm.com (Ronald S. Woan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!
Keywords: I can't believe this from an IBM'er!
Message-ID: <1172@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 18 Dec 89 23:13:53 GMT
References: <2878@d75.UUCP> <6767@tank.uchicago.edu> <1989Dec17.112127.27333@me.toronto.edu> <14960@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <1989Dec17.223025.6618@me.toronto.edu> <1989Dec18.040441.30118@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> <33269@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Reply-To: @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Organization: IBM-Austin, AWD
Lines: 58

I can't believe this came from anyone at IBM, much less on the same
token ring!

In article <2878@d75.UUCP>, robin@sabre.uucp (Robin D. Wilson/1000000)
writes:
> You can learn any program faster with the Mac/Amiga than on the
> PeeCee.  This is because you have a consistant user interface on the
> mac/amiga.

True to a certain degree, but is quickly changing as software
manufacturers port to Windows or OS/2 environments. Even so, the
majority of good (commercial) programs out there come with online help
and tutorials these days. I can't even remember the last time I had to
read a manual except for language compilers.

> You can print out a "HIGH-QUALITY" document faster on Mac.  Desktop
> Publishing is far and away superior on the Mac to anything offered
> on the PeeCee.  It is more powerful, faster, better looking, more
> flexible, and easier to use than anything the PeeCee could probably
> EVER offer.  In the same amount of time, an experienced user on a
> Mac vs an equally experienced user on a PeeCee would turn out a
> document an order of magnitude superior to the PeeCee user's
> document.

I don't see Interleaf or Frame for the Macintosh for the power
publishers. As for ease, Pagemaker on the PC is virtually identical to
Pagemaker for the Mac.

> You can diskcopy faster.  It may sound simple, but it is invariabley
> true.  It is far faster to grab a disk with the mouse, and move it
> over to the disk that you want it to copy onto; than it is to type
> diskcopy a: b: (or whatever).  This; of course, assumes an equal
> amount of bytes being copied.

How often do you use diskcopy anyways. What really disturbs me about
the Mac is the absence of some way to bypass the stupid traversal
through folders (directories) by clicking. That is something that
wastes a lot more time, more often than typing "diskcopy a: b:." On
the pc (as in UNIX) you can just give the entire path specification
which isn't all that difficult with Anarkey or some other filename
completion utility (ala csh in UNIX). For novices there is always the
graphical point and shoot interfaces provided with Windows, Norton
Commander, Desqview, etc...

The name of the game in MSDOS and the PC world is choice. You aren't
glued to any one frozen standard or held at the mercy of one supplier.
Just try to add color to a non-Mac II or find low-cost fax boards or
even add a joystick. Give me an "open" system anyday, even if the
learning curve is a little greater.  Personally I think MSDOS is fine
as a monitor, but give me UNIX for an operating system anyday!

						Ron

+-----All Views Expressed Are My Own And Are Not Necessarily Shared By------+
+------------------------------My Employer----------------------------------+
+ Ronald S. Woan  (IBM VNET)WOAN AT AUSTIN, (AUSTIN)ron@woan.austin.ibm.com +
+ outside of IBM       @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron +
+ last resort                                        woan@peyote.cactus.org +