🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <danpop.826581877@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) wrote:

> In <4i1lvn$899@meaddata.lexis-nexis.com> christw@meaddata.com
(Christopher C. Wood) writes:
> 
> >In article <danpop.826424237@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch (Dan Pop) writes:
> >
> >|> Again, pure vapour vs shipping OS's and applications.  That's the best
> >|> a MacOS fan can do today.  Can you say lame? 
> >
> >How many shipping WinNT/Win95-native applications are there?  I've
> >been seeing counts around 200.  There are 1,500 native PowerMac
> >applications, and around 10,000 MacOS applications.
> 
> Let's avoid comparing apples to oranges.  Compare MacOS (the currently
> shipping version) applications with Windows 3.1 applications and
> shipping 32-bit Windows applications with shipping Copland applications.  
> What gives?
> 
> Dan
> --
> Dan Pop
> CERN, CN Division
> Email: danpop@mail.cern.ch 
> Mail:  CERN - PPE, Bat. 31 R-004, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland

Huh???!!!??

Aren't NT and Win95 both currently shipping? It seems a fair comparison;
hasn't NT been around as long as the Powermacs? And considering the hype
and marketing push by MS, shouldn't we expect native apps to be arriving
more quickly? I seem to remember there being ca. 300 PowerMac native apps
very shortly after their introduction.

When Copland arrives (holding my breath, of course ;-)), then perhaps it
would be fair to compare Win3.1 apps vs. System 7 apps, and Copland-savvy
apps with Win95/NT native apps. At this point in time, the comparison you
suggest is ridiculous and illogical.