[comp.sys.apple] APPLE ][ ... vs MAC ... why ??

david@jc3b21.UUCP (David Quarles) (03/22/89)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I read both the Apple ][ and the Macintosh newsgroups and I see one
against the other ...

My solution ... get one of each !!!

I USE BOTH MACHINES ... and you know what ??? It doesn't bother me one
bit ... and the computers don't care either ...

SO  THERE  !!! ...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dave =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EOT

gviernes@DCA-PAC.DCA.MIL ("Glenn P. Viernes ", BBNCC) (03/23/89)

Dave,

You're my kind of guy.  I've been bopping around in the applications side of
the computer business for a lot of years.  And Ive found that users/ customers
don't really care about brand names or flashy models.  The main issue is always
'can the system satisfy the need?' and 'can you guarantee that system will do
it from day-one and never fail?' As a network analyst, I'm primarily interested
in system performance within given constaints (price, vendor support, software
availability, upgrade design features, and of course politics).  Beyond this
I'm not interested in filibustering.

By the way, I have an Apple //e, a Mac SE, and I am contemplating getting my
hands on a used 386 machine.  I don't think there will ever be a general
purpose micro which will satisfy everyone's dearest fantasy.  All I need is the
right tool for the job at hand...and a //e, SE, and 386 make a reasonably nice
tool kit.

Glenn

p.s.  However I've been known to be all wet and opinionated.  The last time I
checked I was still human.

david@jc3b21.UUCP (David Quarles) (03/24/89)

From article <9144@claris.com>, by wombat@claris.com (Scott Lindsey):
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> But obviously, some machines are better at doing some things than others.

	AGREED!  THAT'S WHY I USE BOTH ... 

> The other problem is that the average user CAN'T get one of each.  S/He can
> only afford 1 machine & must dedicate all computing resources to it.  That's
> why the big debate.

	WELL, OKAY.  BUT IT LOOKS LIKE (ACCORDING TO A POST A FEW
	NUMBERS ABOVE SCOTT'S AND THE 21 MARCH 89 ISSUE OF MACWEEK), THAT
	ALL THIS DEBATE WILL GRADUALLY COME TO A CLOSE IF WHAT HAS BEEN
	QUOTED IS TO COME TO PASS ...

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dave =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EOT