🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4j1fjb$1fo@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, rkswamy@unity.ncsu.edu (Ravi K.
Swamy) wrote:

> In article <dke-2303960737200001@adnline15.adnc.com>,
> David K. Every <dke@adnc.com> wrote:
> >In article <4iumn9$jn5@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, rkswamy@eos.ncsu.edu (Ravi
> >Krishna Swamy) wrote:
> >
> >> I do think it's sad that they shoved these research OS's into the
> >> rest of the world without taking the rough edges off, but I'd much
> >> rather have some rough edges than something "easy to use" (I've
> >> never really found them easy to use, but hey...) which crashes
> >> more than once a month.
> >
> >Why? The question is ULTIMATE productivity.
> 
> Exactly and different people do things different ways.

True. But there ARE some differences.

For example... a person that likes to use 32 character file names on a CLI
and not use auto-completion will 

A) be less productive than a different person that uses a GUI with the
same work pattern/proficiency 
B) be less productive than a different person that uses a CLI but names
his files shorter, or uses completion

So is that the fault of the computer or the workers habits?!?

A CLI makes HIM work the way the computer needs... the GUI is generally
more flexible. 

> > - but I gain 100 TIMES
> >that amount by increased productivity due to a better UI, easier
> >configurability, and an easier to use system, and having all the "rough
> >edges" off.
> 
> All of these are relative and depend on personal opinion.  

True. But they can also be objectively measured and averaged. And whenever
they are, the GUI gain DO make the difference.... and it is often a
whopping BIG difference. That does not mean that all 100% of the
population will be faster - just the 98% that I usually specify.
 
> > Not to mention the Apps that also use the better UI, so I have
> >CONSISTANCY and a metaphore - something that Unix flavors DO NOT have.
> 
> Personally I like having different looking apps.  It keeps the screen
> from looking too boring,

Sure and some people do not have any taste and have a snot-green car, with
red vynle interior, and dingle balls around the inside of the car, and
flashing little disco lights all over the monstrosity. They have that
freedom - but objectively the majority of the population would NOT call
that tasteful. 

> but what I do want is better interaction
> between the apps.  Clipboards that can hold any type of object besides
> plain text can be very convenient.  That's the only thing I don't
> like about Unix/X but it is more because app developers don't bother
> rather than it isn't possible.  Now that CDE is finally here you
> *should* see a consistent desktop and better interaction between
> apps.

The reason more people do not bother on Unix is because it is not a
requirement. The system does not handle most of it for them, and their app
will often be considered complete WITHOUT those features.

On a Mac an app would NOT be considered complete without those functions.
(Actually there are a very few that might - but they are the exceptions...
while in Unix/Dos/etc. the ones that use consistancy are usually the
exception.

> >So ultimately I save more time/money by using Mac, even with an occasional
> >reboot.
> >
> >Now for a server I can DEFINITELY see your point. Or for lab analysis,
> >data acquisition, etc. I agree that Unix is cool. Just not for mainstream
> >usage. 
> 
> I wouldn't want to put my mom on a UNIX box unless it was NeXTSTEP
> or maybe something with CDE. 

Even so I think you would have a LOT more problems - and the likelyhood of
her ever learning how to manage her own system would be MUCH smaller than
if you put her on a MAc.

> Still, I usually despise mainstream
> everything to start with...  and I go with what I like and find
> useful not what everybody else thinks is popular.

Thats fine for you... but you also had better be smart enough to realize
the costs. Yes your mom, or whatever user you set up that way may be more
productive than otherwise (or may not), but likely they are going to be
LESS able to use those skills elsewhere as they are less mainstreamed. If
you know the costs (and they do) and they want it that way - then I will
not argue.

> >> All I have to do is go back to my old office and listen to a Mac
> >> rebooting and I'm happy that I'm using Solaris and Linux.
> >
> >When I've crashed Solaris (and waited 10 minutes to go through the boot
> >process) -  or had problems with Sun's because the scripts are all hard
> >coded to use a CD-ROM and device 3 on the SCSI chain, and we've got ours
> >on a different address (because we have multiple resident) - or I've had
> >to reconfigure one of the buggers - I thank GOD I use a Mac most of the
> >time.
> 
> Sure.  I'm not claiming UNIX is extremely simple to use.  You value ease
> of use and if you only get a little bit more stability from UNIX then
> it isn't worth it to you.  I value the opposite.

OK. My point was that most people do not (value the 1 less crash/week for
the sake of losing lots of personal productivity). And for most people
that IS the tradeoff. 

I get probably one crash a DAY (programmer who runs lots of apps and
simultaneously) and I would still not take the step down in productivity
that unix would give me. Of course in 1 week of programming I brought NT
down about 4 times (and it took twice as long to boot) - not exactly a
gain, and got it into a bad state when I changed the resoltion of monitor
to something it didn't support (something that is all but impossible on a
Mac). Granted not much of a comparison, but a few things like that can
make the machine much less productive.
-- 
David K. Every           | MaciDo Warrior - The Macintosh Way
Sr. Software Engineer    | 
Jostens Learning Corp.   |