🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DDDB2q.658@news.cis.umn.edu>, Jeff Halverson
<halv0019@gold.tc.umn.edu> wrote:

> docjoe@interramp.com (Joe Ragosta) wrote:
> >In article <40lfch$lfn@eken.hv.se>, henke@hv.se wrote:
> 
> Have you ever seen a professional secretary use the DOS version of
WordPerfect,
> then compared it to one that uses either Mac or Windows version?  The
people who
> have learned on a GUI-type system will invariably use the handicap of
the mouse,
> and the cute button, and slow down their productivity.  Yes--I know-- it
is harder
> and it takes more time to invest in learning a quicker system and all
the shortcut
> keys--but if you put in an initial investment, your short-term losses
will turn
> into your long-term gains.   I don't know about other countries, but I
believe that
> it the achilies heel of American bussiness--Don't invest in long-term, 
just get
> the profits _now_!  (Government is the worst offender of this.)
> 
> Do your business a favor, and invest in it.

Have you ever seen a professional secretary use the Mac version of
Clarisworks? Wanna see who gets through a nice memo with a graph and
spreadsheet embedded in the least amount of time? Sorry, but 1960's Times
Roman memos don't cut it anymore in most places. Most of the secretaries I
know need to spend just as much time in Pagemaker putting together reports
as they do in straight-laced word processors typing memos. 

As for the mouse, you can work just as well without the mouse on a Mac as
a PC, but when you hit that little known command, you can pick up the
mouse and surf the menus faster than you can pick up the manual and flip
to the index.

You are correct about American business - they miss the mark wrt computers
90% of the time, and MS is often how they miss it.

> >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.
> >
> 
> There. You have said it again.  I'm fearful of your short-term goals. 
"MacOS's
> choice of CMT is adequate for the majority of users today."  Note, that
you used
> the word "today".  What about tommorow?  Look ahead.  --Sure, I've heard
it all
> one thousand times-- "MacOS will have it--wait for Copland."  To be
honest, I'd
> rather have a well tested model that has been in existance for a while.

Ok, look ahead to tommorrow. Copland will reach those goals about the same
time as Win95. Win95 is here but the apps are much further behind - still
trying to get to 32bit code? Please. Where is the Win product line going?
According to MS you should skip '95 and go to NT - that's the long term.
What about the P6 - it's looking kinda weak right now. What about after
that? P7? The x86 line is gonna have to break soon. Apple's got 604e
coming, 620 coming, 615 coming, CHRP coming. I don't see a lot of future
in the Wintel world - a lot of now (hell, we had 3 years of 'Well, our
next version of Win...') a lot of '95 will be just like a Mac' and a lot
of 'Where do you want to go today?'. It's Apple that is giving direction
to the future - they are telling us what to expect in '97, '98 so that we
can plan.

Go ahead. Look to the future. When does Windows turn into 32 bit code?
When does it get full PM's? When do you get these things? When MS dumps
Win for NT? Joy.

-- 
Bob Cassidy
UC Irvine