🚀 go-pugleaf

I worked at ComputerLand for a while, and was asked to compare
window and the mac quite often.  The main differences I have seen
with regard to new users are as follows:

1)  Windows runs slower on a comparatively powerful machine (of
	course, you can't really compare mac and ibm power, but the
	windows environment is a software "emulation" shell, whereas
    the mac environment is built into the hardware.  Of course it
	is going to run faster on the mac.

2)  Windows is a little more awkward, a little less intuitive.
	When Microsoft wrote windows, they had to make it look and 
	function significantly differently from the mac system so that
	they wouldn't get sued (they got sued anyway).  While the 
	differences are just fine for most DOS users, people who
	haven't used computers before usually seemed much more confused
	with windows.  They would try to do things the way they did
	them on the macintosh, and it just doesn't work.  Note: even
    though you are using a graphical interface, you are still
	using the DOS filing system.  Whenever you want to add a new
	program to your windows library, you have to locate it in the
	normal DOS mode of access.

3)  This is the most important difference, in my oppinion.  When 
	programs are written for the macintosh, they are all (with a
	very few exceptions) written to use the same menu structure,
	the same mouse functions, often even the same commands (cut,
    copy, paste, print, all show up in the same place in most
	programs).  What this means to a new user, is that, once they
	learn how to use ONE program on the mac, it is very easy to
	transfer that knowledge to other software.  The learning curve
	goes way up.

	Now let's talk about windows.  Many programs that the user 
	might want to use, aren't even available for windows.  Yes,
	you might be able to start Wordperfect from windows, but you
	won't be able to take advantage of the cut/paste or linking
	features which make windows worth having.  More importantly,
	since there has been no standard set for DOS programs, the
	interfaces are all over the place.  Every time a user wants
	to learn a new program, they are going to have to start from
	scratch (at least as far as memorizing the commands, if not
	learning the functions of the program).  The learning curve
	is much lower.

What this all comes down to, is that windows is a poor substitute
for a macintosh.  I have nothing against DOS systems, and in fact
use one often, but I almost never use windows.  It's not a lot 
more than a toy to me.  I would rather use batch commands to start
my programs.

If you want to take advantage of specific DOS software, get a DOS
system, and if you like, get windows too.  If you want to get a
graphically based, intuitive machine, get a macintosh.  Windows is
a poor substitute at best.

						:-D ave

In article <1991May10.135518.5538@world.std.com>, hal@world.std.com (Harry A Levinson) writes...

>I am afraid to ask this because I don't want to start a roaring
>fire of flames but...
> 
>I have been using both a Mac and a DOS machine for about 5 years.  I have
>recently been trying to help some friends with their 386 machine
>running Windows 3/ W4W and XL4W (facelift is installed and enabled).  
>The 386 is 16MHz with 2Mb.  The printer is an Okidata 24 pin.
> 
>My impression of Windows are:
> 
>1. It has tryed to impose a GUI environment where it does not quite fit.  
>   As a result computer novices take longer to learn how to use a Windows 
>   machine than a Mac.  However once acquainted with Windows both environments
>   provide similar capabilites.
> 
>2. Adding applications and peripherals is easier (for a novice) on the Mac.  
> 
>3. It seems to take more Intel machine to get the same response as a Mac.
> 
>Are these consistent with others?
> 
>I would appreciate it if comments could be limited to those with working 
>knowledge of both Windows and Mac.  I am especially interested in 
>comments from people who have seen reactions to both systems from
>complete computer illiterate types learning to use a computer for the
>first time.
> 
>Thanks,
>harry levinson
>hal@world.std.com