kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (02/14/91)
12121@helios.TAMU.EDU (Daryl) writes: Craig> Clearly the A3000 is superior to the NeXT. > After all, the former can emulate a Mac. P.S. :) Kevin> Personally, I've always been confused about this particular "gloat"... Daryl> First of all, the inital remark was smiley'd, so it's definitely > tongue-in-cheek humor. Gee, _no_ kidding. Shocker! And I suppose your newsreader missed my own: Kevin> P.S. :) :) Different viewpoint, eh? :-) <sigh> I guess we need c.s.a.a.joke to clue some people in, eh? Obviously my quotes around "gloat" and three smileys weren't enough. [* insert wait state of 30 minutes here; deciding not to jab too much *] >Anyway, taking your comment seriously, the Mac OS is hardly portable. >Every Mac emulator I've seen requires the Mac ROM images in some form. Okay then, seriously, I'll let someone else explain why this doesn't mean what you think (as far as 68K hardware portability goes). >The only legal way to accomplish this is with real Apple-manufactured >Mac ROMs. Ooops. Darn. You figured it partly out. [& I didn't wait long enuf :-] >Now, as to the marketability of this, if all things were equal, >wouldn't you rather have a computer that ran software for 3 machines >instead of just 1? Too much seriousness for me to take today. <yawn> Umm, depends on which machines, but probably: no. Especially if I have to give up my multitasking to do so. I'd also rather have software which ran on three machines instead of just one. Gives me a choice of hardware. Kevin>In addition, couldn't a Mac user claim: "I can move from a Mac to an >Amiga or ST or RISC without losing my programs, yet owners of those >computers cannot move to a Mac and do the same." ?? Craig>But they wouldn't say that. It's bad marketing. How would this >help to sell *your* machines? Ah. Maybe you _did_ get the jokes after all <g>. Alternative serious answer: I didn't say "Apple Corp". I said "user". You don't think it's an advantage to a Mac user, that he can also buy/use an Atari STacy to run his Mac programs, instead of overpaying for a Mac laptop?? And is it a disadvantage that Unix users can buy other than AT&T computers? Yes, yes, I realize you were talking brandname hardware viewpoint :-). PS : Hey, someone's gotta play devil's advocate, or our brains would lock. PPS: I'm really not a mean old man. But you left off _my_ smileys. Not nice. PPPS: Any of you guys who haven't yet bought Valentine flowers for your college girlfriend, wake up now! best - kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>
craig@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Craig Hubley) (02/18/91)
In article <1991Feb13.230520.661@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: >Kevin>In addition, couldn't a Mac user claim: "I can move from a Mac to an > >Amiga or ST or RISC without losing my programs, yet owners of those > >computers cannot move to a Mac and do the same." ?? >Craig>But they wouldn't say that. It's bad marketing. How would this > >help to sell *your* machines? Hey, I didn't say this. Keep your attributions straight. 'F' in rn... > Ah. Maybe you _did_ get the jokes after all <g>. Alternative serious > answer: I didn't say "Apple Corp". I said "user". You don't think > it's an advantage to a Mac user, that he can also buy/use an Atari STacy > to run his Mac programs, instead of overpaying for a Mac laptop?? And > is it a disadvantage that Unix users can buy other than AT&T computers? > Yes, yes, I realize you were talking brandname hardware viewpoint :-). That said, I agree with you. It is definitely an advantage to the user to buy a machine that keeps options open. The fact that the corp. that makes the box would never acknowledge those options as legitimate (although some do, Apple seemingly never will) isn't important. Any good salesman will. Failure to acknowledge such options as a customer value, by the way, is a sign of their insecurity that you will actually stick to their own system once you have the box. In other words, if they don't acknowledge that running Mac software is a legit option, then they are not confident that you will want to use their own (say NeXT or Amiga) software over the emulator. In technical terms, what it means is that Apple is selling some pretty weak hardware if the lowest common denominator of several other boxes (e.g. Atari, Amiga, maybe soon the NeXT) can run its software. Just my opinion, -- Craig Hubley "...get rid of a man as soon as he thinks himself an expert." Craig Hubley & Associates------------------------------------Henry Ford Sr. craig@gpu.utcs.Utoronto.CA UUNET!utai!utgpu!craig craig@utorgpu.BITNET craig@gpu.utcs.toronto.EDU {allegra,bnr-vpa,decvax}!utcsri!utgpu!craig
kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) (02/18/91)
In <1991Feb17.201051.16448@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> craig@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Craig Hubley) writes: >In article <1991Feb13.230520.661@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> kdarling@hobbes.ncsu.edu (Kevin Darling) writes: >>Kevin>In addition, couldn't a Mac user claim: "I can move from a Mac to an >> >Amiga or ST or RISC without losing my programs, yet owners of those >> >computers cannot move to a Mac and do the same." ?? >>Craig>But they wouldn't say that. It's bad marketing. How would this >> >help to sell *your* machines? > >Hey, I didn't say this. Keep your attributions straight. 'F' in rn... Ooops <blush>. That's what happens when a sleepy-head edits a file. I must have lost the first attribution line, and gotten confused while trying to avoid a huge quoting (which I dislike). Many sincere apologies! I do agree with what you _did_ <g> say. Regards, kevin <kdarling@catt.ncsu.edu>