🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <672@sys.uea.ac.uk> jrk@uea-sys.UUCP (Richard Kennaway) writes:
>In article <459@lloyd.camex.uucp> kent@lloyd.UUCP (Kent Borg) writes:
>>If you can't keep your desktop clean enough to be seen, then don't put
>>file icons there.  I can't, so I don't.
>
>I use a Mac+.  Small screen.  As soon as you run an application, you cant
>see the desktop.

Yup.  This is absolutely true (and one of the reasons I ended up going to a
II in the first place.  Apple needs to realize that one of the machine they're
going to need in place,  for the long term, is a "compact" line (one-piece
transportable) fairly inexpensive Mac with a 640x480 13" screen.  This would
be a bit larger (mostly on the width dimension) but not unreasonably so).My
AppleColor 13" is not *that* big, after all.  It is ludicrous for people to
have to pay $4K up (and this is at student prices) for a Mac with a decent
size screen.  At street prices, with a HD and just monochrone display, we're
in the $6-7K range.  Absolutely ridiculous if all you want is a larger screen
(and there is a fair amount of those people out there, believe me).  Witness
the popularity of large screen displays (both FPDs and Portrait), even though
you have to pay through the nose for them.  There is a niche for an SE or
SE/30 witha 13" display, guys.  From the stories in MacUser about your labs,
it looks like you've got lots of products in development - let them see the
light!  Otherwise, you might turn into Xerox, which because of the blinders
worn by management wasted *astounding* amounts of technology developed by
them at PARC (A PC in 1973?  A Mac in 1979?  Sheesh).

-Ivan

Internet: captkidd@athena.mit.edu