Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:40749 comp.sys.mac:45088
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!texbell!texsun!newstop!sun!concertina!fiddler
From: fiddler%concertina@Sun.COM (Steve Hix)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!
Message-ID: <129616@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 26 Dec 89 19:59:52 GMT
References: <6767@tank.uchicago.edu> <1989Dec17.112127.27333@me.toronto.edu> <635@taylor.UUCP>
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac
Lines: 22

In article <635@taylor.UUCP>, jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Shekhel) writes:
> debugger.  What I meant was that using a second screen as real estate for
> your GUI is useless.  That's what the discussion was about.

Useless?  It's convenient enough when the application you're working on
happens to use the entire screen of the machine you're writing for.  The
second monitor beign used to run the debugger while the first is running
the application sounds pretty good to me...

> OK.  Enough said about this.  I'm sure that the Mac manages multiple screens
> in a much cleaner way than the PC.  I still believe that stacking 8 monitors
> on your desktop is not the best solution for a workstation-type display.

Certainly not on *my* desk...but two would be nice.

------------

"...Then anyone who leaves behind him a written manual, and likewise
anyone who receives it, in the belief that such writing will be clear
and certain, must be exceedingly simple-minded..."

		Plato, _Phaedrus_ 275d