ggw@wolves.uucp (Gregory G. Woodbury) (06/09/90)
In article <6567@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) writes: >In article <26637.266e6ed4@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> ac08@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes: >>> And on the Amiga, and the NeXT, you get both. [CLI & GUI] >>And once Amiga finishes polishing theirs, it'll be a helluva system. > >Uhm, I hate to tell you this, but many people (including myself) prefer the >Amiga to the Mac. Why? It's faster, it has a "true OS," supports better >hardware, etc. > >The GUI and CLI are both superior to what the Mac offers; the CLI is better >than the Mac can *ever* offer (excluding A/UX). Unfortunately for the Amiga zelots, the maker doesn't have the wherewithal to turn it into a major player and all the good software is user contributed stuff. And the hardware support is also mostly third party. As for the Amiga GUI. Its a pretty poor GUI at best (unless they have improved the default resolution of the monitor). Unfortunately for the Mac enthusiasts, Apple is loseing its focus and costs way too much (unless you get it via a discount program). And without A/UX it doesn't really multitask worth a darn. Hmmmmmm. Sure seems pretty evenly matched. You pay your money and take your chances. -- Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw ...mcnc!wolves!ggw [use the maps!] Domain: ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw%wolves@mcnc.mcnc.org [The line eater is a boojum snark! ] <standard disclaimers apply>
ag@otter.hpl.hp.com (Ajay Gupta ) (06/14/90)
/ otter:comp.os.misc / ggw@wolves.uucp (Gregory G. Woodbury) / 3:18 am Jun 9, 1990 / In article <6567@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) writes: >In article <26637.266e6ed4@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> ac08@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes: >>> And on the Amiga, and the NeXT, you get both. [CLI & GUI] >>And once Amiga finishes polishing theirs, it'll be a helluva system. > >Uhm, I hate to tell you this, but many people (including myself) prefer the >Amiga to the Mac. Why? It's faster, it has a "true OS," supports better >hardware, etc. > >The GUI and CLI are both superior to what the Mac offers; the CLI is better >than the Mac can *ever* offer (excluding A/UX). Unfortunately for the Amiga zelots, the maker doesn't have the wherewithal to turn it into a major player and all the good software is user contributed stuff. And the hardware support is also mostly third party. As for the Amiga GUI. Its a pretty poor GUI at best (unless they have improved the default resolution of the monitor). Unfortunately for the Mac enthusiasts, Apple is loseing its focus and costs way too much (unless you get it via a discount program). And without A/UX it doesn't really multitask worth a darn. Hmmmmmm. Sure seems pretty evenly matched. You pay your money and take your chances. -- Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw ...mcnc!wolves!ggw [use the maps!] Domain: ggw@cds.duke.edu ggw%wolves@mcnc.mcnc.org [The line eater is a boojum snark! ] <standard disclaimers apply> ----------
hyc@math.lsa.umich.edu (Howard Chu) (06/17/90)
In article <1990Jun9.021855.8767@wolves.uucp> ggw@wolves.UUCP (Gregory G. Woodbury) writes: >In article <6567@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) writes: >>In article <26637.266e6ed4@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> ac08@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes: >>>> And on the Amiga, and the NeXT, you get both. [CLI & GUI] >>>And once Amiga finishes polishing theirs, it'll be a helluva system. >>Uhm, I hate to tell you this, but many people (including myself) prefer the >>Amiga to the Mac. Why? It's faster, it has a "true OS," supports better >>hardware, etc. >>The GUI and CLI are both superior to what the Mac offers; the CLI is better >>than the Mac can *ever* offer (excluding A/UX). > Unfortunately for the Amiga zelots, the maker doesn't have the >wherewithal to turn it into a major player and all the good software is >user contributed stuff. And the hardware support is also mostly third >party. Third party hardware support is an asset, not a liability. It's one of the benefits of an open architecture. It lets you pick and choose what kinds of peripherals to obtain, without being locked into a single vendor's pricing fixtures. Good user contributed software is also an asset - it shows that the user community is interested in the machine and actively working with it. It means that people are spending brainpower doing innovative projects on the machine, instead of blindly pointing and clicking thru canned menus. It means that the machine is alive, and in use, not just gathering dust in a corner somewhere, or generating BTUs. > As for the Amiga GUI. Its a pretty poor GUI at best (unless >they have improved the default resolution of the monitor). That interlaced video sure was ugly to look at, that's for sure. Apparently the new A3000 has a flicker-killer circuit. (But I don't know the details, I own an Atari ST. And the ST has hi-resolution without interlace...) > > Unfortunately for the Mac enthusiasts, Apple is loseing its >focus and costs way too much (unless you get it via a discount program). >And without A/UX it doesn't really multitask worth a darn. Was OS9/68K ever made available for the Mac? It seems that in the Unix arena you need a 68030 based system before you can think about object-code compatibility. It'd be nice to have compatibility for the humble 68000. I've seen A/UX, and seen enough to know that I don't want to *use* A/UX. I've *used* ST-Minix, and it's decent, but not too speedy. Of course, OS9 is a little more pricey than Minix... -- -- Howard Chu @ University of Michigan ... the glass is always greener on the side ...
dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com (Eric Dittman) (06/27/90)
In article <O6846:B@ficc.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > ... Anyway, this is off the track... When has that ever stopped a discussion in a newsgroup before? :-) > In article <55.267e2342@skbat.csc.ti.com> dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com (Eric Dittman) writes: >> Untrue. I am a Mac owner that insists that the cooperative multitasking >> available under Multifinder is a kludge that is only tolerated because >> it's better than no multitasking. > > Well, then you're not a Mac Zealot (TM someone, I'm sure), so I wasn't talking > about you. I know the type you mean. I guess this is a knee-jerk reaction due to local conversations with AmigaZealots (also TM someone, probably) who lump all Mac owners in the same group. Sorry. >> I like the smooth operation of the >> Amiga multitasking. I just never liked the Amiga's GUI. > > I must admit that the Mac GUI is pretty damn snazzy. I hate the one-button > mouse and pull-down menus, but they're (damn it) catching on. I don't mind the pull-down menus. I would like more than one button on the mouse, though. I'd like to see Apple introduce a mouse with three buttons. Maybe Apple will bring out a multi-button mouse when they bring out their OS with preemptive multitasking (System 8 maybe?). Sure, there will be some compatibility problems with the older Mac mouses, but then again, there will be compatibility problems with the old Mac software. I'm in the minority that would like to see Apple go ahead and get everything changed now, rather than changing things bit-by-bit. If we're going to break, lets really break! >> I wouldn't say the Amiga is at least 25 years ahead of the competition, > > Well, historically. In terms of operating system history, the Amiga is > somewhere in the early '80s. The underlying O/S on the Mac and IBM are > somewhere in the early '60s. 20 years, then. > -- > Peter da Silva. `-_-' > +1 713 274 5180. > <peter@ficc.ferranti.com> While I'd put MSDOS in the '60s category, I would put the MacOS in more of a mid- to late '70s category. The MacOS was designed with the future in mind, unfortunately there were a few places where Apple aimed in the wrong direction. Eric Dittman Texas Instruments - Component Test Facility dittman@skitzo.csc.ti.com dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com Disclaimer: I don't speak for Texas Instruments or the Component Test Facility. I don't even speak for myself. I also don't guess I speak for the MacZealots either. BTW, what is the " `-_-' " symbol supposed to be?
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (07/03/90)
In article <67.2687c62e@skbat.csc.ti.com> dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com (Eric Dittman) writes: > I know the type you mean. I guess this is a knee-jerk reaction due to > local conversations with AmigaZealots (also TM someone, probably) who lump > all Mac owners in the same group. Sorry. Well, the Mac seems to collect a larger-than-usual proportion of Crusaders. It's a breakthrough machine, and I'd have no hesitation recommending it to people who need a computer but don't want to deal with one. Except for one thing: Apple. Too many MacZealots have convinced them they really ARE gods. > I don't mind the pull-down menus. I would like more than one button on > the mouse, though. If they'd standardise it. I like SELECT-PERFORM-EXTEND, where SELECT is used to mark things, PERFORM does a default action (like double-clicking), and EXTEND provides extra actions (via a menu, of any type, or changing a button text, or...). The Amiga has only two buttons, so you double-click on SELECT to get PERFORM, and EXTEND is called MENU. > While I'd put MSDOS in the '60s category, I would put the MacOS in more > of a mid- to late '70s category. It's a split. The underlying O/S itself is still in the library-of-common- functions stage, with the application still managing the whole system. That puts it in the early '60s. The user interface is late '70s (mid-to-late Xerox Smalltalk stuff). > BTW, what is the " `-_-' " symbol supposed to be? It's a wolf. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf today?" +1 713 274 5180. 'U` <peter@ficc.ferranti.com> --
dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com (Eric Dittman) (07/04/90)
sc.ti.com> <n8e469e@xds13.ferranti.com> Followup-To: c.ti.com> <n8e469e@xds13.ferranti.com> Organization: Texas Instruments Component Test Facility Lines: 54 In article <N8E469E@xds13.ferranti.com>, peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > Well, the Mac seems to collect a larger-than-usual proportion of Crusaders. > It's a breakthrough machine, and I'd have no hesitation recommending it to > people who need a computer but don't want to deal with one. Except for one > thing: Apple. Too many MacZealots have convinced them they really ARE gods. I see a lot of Amiga and Atari crusaders as well. This is probably due to the "Us vs. Them" attitude that develops from owning a computer with a small (compared to the IBM PC clones) market. >> [comments about wanting a 3-button mouse deleted] > If they'd standardise it. I like SELECT-PERFORM-EXTEND, where SELECT is > used to mark things, PERFORM does a default action (like double-clicking), > and EXTEND provides extra actions (via a menu, of any type, or changing > a button text, or...). The Amiga has only two buttons, so you double-click > on SELECT to get PERFORM, and EXTEND is called MENU. If there's one thing that Apple has done right, it's standardise. I think if Apple brought out a 3-button mouse, they'd also update their development guidelines to reflect the "standard" method of dealing with the buttons. >> While I'd put MSDOS in the '60s category, I would put the MacOS in more >> of a mid- to late '70s category. > > It's a split. The underlying O/S itself is still in the library-of-common- > functions stage, with the application still managing the whole system. That > puts it in the early '60s. The user interface is late '70s (mid-to-late > Xerox Smalltalk stuff). And this goes back to the "Is the Mac user interface really part of the Mac OS?" argument that's been beaten to death lately (and which I've tired of reading). >> BTW, what is the " `-_-' " symbol supposed to be? > > It's a wolf. > -- > Peter da Silva. `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf today?" > +1 713 274 5180. 'U` > <peter@ficc.ferranti.com> > -- Uh, oh, the wolf has its tongue sticking out. And I hope the ' ` are whiskers (otherwise, the wolf must be drooling). :-) And completely off the subject, do you own a wolf or something? Eric Dittman Texas Instruments - Component Test Facility dittman@skitzo.csc.ti.com dittman@skbat.csc.ti.com Disclaimer: I don't speak for Texas Instruments or the Component Test Facility. I don't even speak for myself.