[comp.sys.ibm.pc] Why make your IBM act like a Mac?

j@bucsf.bu.edu (James Allard) (02/10/90)

I've been reading a lot of messages lately from people that want their IBMs
to act like Macs.......and now I have to deal with Microsoft Word for
Windows so I can use my mouse with my word processor.  I'm getting tired of
this.  If I want to draw, or run CAD,  or play games,  I'll use my mouse.
Please stop trying to make my mouse run my system (Windows),  stop trying
to make my word processor look like it's Mac counterpart.  I bought a PC
because I wanted a command line.  I wanted arrow keys.  I wanted to
compute.  I didn't buy it to click.  If you want to click,  go to
comp.sys.mac,  if you want to compute,  be satisfied that you don't have a
nice gif in the background of your shell

Minor flame,

J. Allard

****These opinions are solely mine.  If my employer does not agree with
them,  they didn't have to hire me.....:-)

mp2k+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Palmquist) (02/11/90)

J. Allard writes:

>Please stop trying to make my mouse run my system (Windows),  stop trying
>to make my word processor look like it's Mac counterpart.  I bought a PC
>because I wanted a command line.  I wanted arrow keys.  I wanted to
>compute.  I didn't buy it to click.  If you want to click,  go to
>comp.sys.mac,  if you want to compute,  be satisfied that you don't have a
>nice gif in the background of your shell

I use Macs, PCs, RTs, and Vaxes on a regular basis, and I don't buy your
complaint.  I have a powerful graphical interface (an X-window
forerunner) on my IBM RT workstation that relies heavily on a mouse, and
also supports keystroke commands.  When I want graphics (MacDraw II, for
instance), I use a Mac, but even there I rely heavily on keystrokes to
speed things up (BTW, I despise Mac keyboards that lack arrow keys). 
When I want statistics, I run BMDP on the vax or systat on my 386.  And
when I'm using the workstation or the PC, the mouse helps move data back
and forth quickly between windows.

I think it's better to have both (a mouse and an intelligently designed
set of keystroke commands -- I'm ruling out WordPerfect here), than only
one or the other.  And after using both MS Word 4.0 for the Mac and 5.0
for the PC, I'm looking forward to my upgrade to Word for Windows.

Happily pointing and clicking,

Mike Palmquist


************************
mp2k@andrew.cmu.edu
Department of English
Carnegie Mellon University
voice:  412/268-5636

Will@cup.portal.com (Will E Estes) (02/12/90)

< I've been reading a lot of messages lately from people that want their IBMs
< to act like Macs.......and now I have to deal with Microsoft Word for
< Windows so I can use my mouse with my word processor.  I'm getting tired of
< this.  If I want to draw, or run CAD,  or play games,  I'll use my mouse.
< Please stop trying to make my mouse run my system (Windows),  stop trying

This remark shows you have never used either Windows or Windows For Word
as more than a toy (sometimes we make reality conform to our expectations).
Have you noticed that the menus and dialog boxes in all Windows applications
have one character underlined?  These are accelerator keys, and you type
Alt-<underlined character> and this will activate that feature.  What's
more every option in every dialog box has an accelerator key, and this
makes for totally random access to any feature in the dialog box.  I have
been using Windows for years now, and much to my surprise I haven't used
a mouse very often.  There are days of using Excel and Windows Word where
I do not hit the mouse button once.  Every mouse action has a quick
keystroke equivalent.  

I can negotiate the user interface via the accelerators *faster* than I can
a character based application equivalent that does not allow random
access to any of its data-entry screen's fields (the equivalent of a Windows
dialog box's gadgets).  Most DOS applications working in character mode do not
offer such conveniences.  You should choose applications based on
the minimum level of performance that is acceptable to you, the minimum
set of features that your application requires, and the overall comfort
level you feel using the application.  Windows suffers in the first
area, excels in the second area, and it has no equal in the last.
Therefore to condemn it because it gives you the option to use a mouse
is not a fair appraisal of the product at all.

Will              (sun!portal!cup.portal.com!Will)  

jmann@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Jim Mann) (02/13/90)

I've seen nothing in Word for Windows that forces you to use a mouse.
Some things are easier if you use a mouse, but then again some things
in Word for DOS 5.0 are a lot easier if you use a mouse.