Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!apple.com!casseres
From: casseres@apple.com (David Casseres)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: User interface(was Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!)
Message-ID: <5877@internal.Apple.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 89 21:55:48 GMT
References: <920@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca>
Sender: usenet@Apple.COM
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 30

In article <920@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry 
Phillips) writes:

[I wrote]
> >Talk to the application developers.

> That statement speaks volumes. I'd rather have the manufacturer provide
> the right tools, a choice of tools, in ways that allow the user to
> decide for himself. You'd rather be bound by the fascism of the
> manufacturer telling you what user interface is best for you, and
> removing choice.

Let me spell something out for you:  The Mac makes it possible to 
implement a point/click interface; it makes it MUCH EASIER to implement a 
type-in interface.  What "tools" do you think Apple should provide?

> I see no inherent difference between the IBM PC(lones) and the Mac, in
> that the OS only provides one way of communicating with the machine,
> leaving the workarounds to the application programmers and addon
> interface writers.  Even with its two user interfaces, the Amiga has
> its share of folks writing their own versions of them. That should
> tell you and Apple something about trying to force a single type of
> interface down the throats of the computing public.

Apple does not try to force a single type of user interface down anyone's 
throat, as you would know if you would learn anything about the Mac.

David Casseres

Exclaimer:  Hey!