Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!sunfs3!kent From: kent@sunfs3.camex.uucp (Kent Borg) Newsgroups: comp.cog-eng Subject: Re: Request for Comments on Article Found in comp.sys.mac.digest Summary: The story doesn't mean much. Need a controled experiment. Message-ID: <636@sunfs3.camex.uucp> Date: 13 Feb 90 00:02:49 GMT References: <66437@aerospace.AERO.ORG> Reply-To: kent%lloyd@husc6.harvard.edu (Kent Borg) Organization: Camex, Inc., Boston, Mass USA Lines: 49 In article <66437@aerospace.AERO.ORG> lubofsky@aerospace.aero.org (Nick Lubofsky) writes: >Any comments on this hypothesis? (I'm reserving judgement.) [He then quotes an article about a writing class at the University of Delaware using Macintoshes; that the writing was worse than the writing from the IBM version of the course.] The key point here seems to be that the students were given the choice between Macintoshes and PCs. It appears that at the University of Delaware's writing program, good writers preferred IBMs and poor writers preferred the Macintosh. Why? Maybe because the poor writers had not done any writing and the good writers had. Where had those good writers likely done all that writing? More likely on IBMs than on Macs because there are so many more IBMs in the world. Which computer do people choose? The one they know. What if they don't know any computers? I suggest that they tend to choose Macintoshes--if they can afford one and are really presented with the choice. Want to read something truly terrible? Force those same bad writers to use an IBM and *then* see what they hand you. Frightening thought. Alternative explanation: Maybe the Macintosh users were having too much fun playing with the machine to really spend much time writing. I wonder how well they would be writing a year later, once the novelty wore off. I know that the mechanics of writing with a pen or a typewriter were always such a barrier for me that I was nearly helpless in print before I bought my Macintosh. Now I can write a million times better than I could before before. (How well that is, I leave to you.) Third explanation: The bad writers knew they couldn't write and were looking for every easy way out, and the Mac, being easier to use, was their preference. Does that make the Mac bad for writing? No, just easier. Realize that what I am writing here (at a Macintosh, but using emacs running on a Sun) are guesses about what the anecdotal report really means. To know what is going on there, the two groups need to be matched for other factors. Controls are needed. -- Kent Borg lloyd!kent@husc6.harvard.edu or ...!husc6!lloyd!kent MacNet: kentborg H:(617) 776-6899 W:(617)426-3577 "Thumper! Don't let them kill Thumper!" --Zippy, 15 January, 1990