🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <40lfch$lfn@eken.hv.se>, henke@hv.se wrote:

> Mac people often are biased against anything that doesn't have an apple figure
> on the box. If you brother didn't know anything about MSDOS (or any OS or DOS)
> wouldn't he know if MSDOS or Mac was worse than the other, but I guess you
> helped by showing disgust for MSDOS, which was directly transported to him.
> Starting with computers is always a big problem, there's lot of things to
> learn, no matter what platform it is. For example, have you ever noticed how
> some people find it hard to even understand how the little dot on the screen
> can react to that device on the table, and even make that dot go where
they want.

Right. You show someone how to use a mouse and they STILL can't figure out
that moving the mouse left makes the cursor go left, etc. You must deal
with some pretty stupid computer users.

> Most people can use a keyboard, because of its similarity with typewriters.
> It is known, it is big, and it is located very visible.
> See, I even found an advantage of the hated MSDOS. Suppose I tell this to a
> guy who never seen or heard of computers. I go on with learning him the
> "DIR", "COPY" and the different extensions "*.EXE and *.COM to start with".

And memorizing commands is easier than using a mouse. Right.

> 
> What I mean is that many people (mostly Mac fanatics) live in an
illusion where
> they believe multitasking is NOT essential for future evolution.

And some PC fanatics live in an illusion where they believe that Macs
dont' multitask.

> 
> Well, for the moment does it matter less, but I guess 99.99% of the programs
> for win95 in use will be 32-bit version and taking advantage of a multitasked
> Win95.

When? Mac programs have been 32 bit and capable of multitasking for years.

[more feeble ranting about Macs and the claim that they don't multitask]

> 
> Several unix systems have been up for years (or even decades) without a crash
> or lost data, and under that period been serving thousands of users and
uncountable
> jobs. Does this matter? No, because Mac users find it hard to learn to
> master Unix...

Wrong. Macs and UNIX are better for different things. I have a business to
run. Productivity is worth real money. Why should I screw around trying to
teach all the secretaries, clerks, sales people, etc UNIX when MacOS is
easy for them to use? Even Windows costs more than MacOS from a training /
support perspective. UNIX would be even more.


> 
> When you go and buy a new car, your don't understand and want to think
> about technical things like computer-controlled-ignition, pistons made of
> some strange new metal with some strange new design. you leave those things
> to the people who designed the care. They are the experts, they should made
> every possible attempt to make the car better, faster, cheaper, lighter
> and nicer. They should added all new and good technology.
> Now, assume you have cooperative multitasking and preemptive multitasking,
> don't think of anything else, which one is the better? I feel sorry for you
> if you choosed CMT. Is it fair to fool low-end users which don't understand
> these thing by not using the new technology? Would it be OK to sell a modern
> car that consumed 10gallons/mile of gazoline, if he didn't understand these
> thing? No, I think that would be dishonest. 
> Thosed who don't know much about computers are fooled into that multitasking
> is not needed, if they for some reason ask the question. Ofcourse they
> believe you, because, in their eyes, you are the expert.
> 

You just refuted your own argument. If someone buys a car because it
achieves 30 mpg and 0-60 in 10 seconds (insert your own criteria here),
why do they need to know how it gets there? If they care about machined vs
cast parts, fine, but why is is NECESSARY to know the innards of a car? A
computer is the same way. If CMT and PMT are the same from the user's
perspective, who cares?

Before you continue your flames, I'll say I believe PMT is better than
CMT. However, MacOS's choice of CMT is adequate for the majority of users
today.

-- 
Regards, Joe Ragosta -- 100% Chemical and proud of it.
Microsoft Network is prohibited from redistributing this work in any form,
in whole or in part. Copyright, Joseph Ragosta, 1995. License to distribute
this post is available to Microsoft for $1000. Posting without permission
constitutes an agreement to these terms. Please send notices of violation
to docjoe@interramp.com and Postmaster@microsoft.com