🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
Digh) wrote:

> Hello,
> 
>         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> brand that would be good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andy 

I have two things to say.  First, this is a religious issue.  Brace
yourself for evangelical responses from both camps.  Second, we're talking
about spending several thousand dollars.  You wouldn't buy a car or
anything else for several thousand dollars without trying it out.  Try out
the computers.  Sit down, spend a half hour with each and decide which
fits your needs.  Keep the salespeople away, don't listen to anything of
any kind under any circumstances that they say to you (you may have more
luck at a college bookstore or, better, computer lab than another
commercial outlet).  Just spend some time on each system doing what you
think you'll be doing with it.

And then buy the mac (my religious preference; YMMV).

Good luck.

-Troy

In article <shinbrot-0410960930560001@chaos.chem-eng.nwu.edu>,
shinbrot@nwu1.edu (Troy Shinbrot) wrote:

> In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
> Digh) wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> >         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> > I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> > The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> > yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> > I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> > brand that would be good.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Andy 
> 
> I have two things to say.  First, this is a religious issue.  Brace
> yourself for evangelical responses from both camps. 

This can seem true at times...

Let me answer this as a first grade teacher that teaches technology as a
steady part of my curriculum - no question - The Mac. Yes there is more PC
software, but most of it is awful. The Mac is great for file saving, the
Internet and the best program for young children - Kid Pix. The ease of
use, and don't listen to people that tell you Windows '95 is easier, I am
biplatformal and I know it's not, is worth the price.

 Second, we're talking
> about spending several thousand dollars.

Not true. Go second hand for a young child.

> Just spend some time on each system doing what you
> think you'll be doing with it.

Good advice.

> And then buy the mac (my religious preference; YMMV).

Better Advice.

> Good luck.
> 
> -Troy

John Donaldson
Brattleboro, VT
johnd@sover.net
http://www.sover.net/~johnd/

Andy D. Digh wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
>         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> brand that would be good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andy

Andy, your kids will learn to use the computer you buy, whichever it is,
so don't worry about user friendliness.  Find out which types of
computers they will come into contact with in school.  It is my feeling
that Mac is losing ground to WINOWS95 et. al.

A computer without the right software is just an ugly piece of modern
sculpture.  Investigate a range of software to see which platform has
the most software of the type you are interested in.

Finally, I tend to try to ride the following edge, rather than the
leading edge for hardware.  First, you save a lot of money if you don't
buy this month's hot stuff.  Second, I'd just as soon let other people
work the bugs out of the software/hardware before I put up with the
hassle. 
 
-- 
David Hole
dhole@netusa1.net

In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
Digh) wrote:

> Hello,
> 
>         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> brand that would be good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andy 

Andy,  
I really don't think the brand is as important as the parent support.  My
son has a Packard Bell computer and purchased several programs for our
granddaughter to use. (Toy Story, Lion King, and I'm not sure what else.)
I have a Mac.  It came with several programs including Sesame Street
Numbers.  When Clarie is with her dad she uses IBM, here at gramma's she
easily switches to Mac. We load them in and let her go, staying nearby to
monitor and encourage.  I wouldn't recommend turning a 5 year old loose
without supervision yet anyway.  Kids today are pretty sharp.  Whatever
you buy the child will learn more quickly than you or I did!
Barb

-- 
**************
Barb Wilkison
English Dept.
Taylor Middle School
Warrenton, Va. 20186
**************

In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu> digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D. Digh) writes:

	   I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
   I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
   The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
   yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.

I own both a Mac II and several PC's; neither of my children has had any
trouble using either machine, starting at age 2 or so.  Mostly they prefer the
PC, but that's because the software on it is newer.

I usually recommend PC's rather than Mac's because

  o as you say, there's more software for them

  o they're cheaper to buy (in terms of bang-for-your-buck) and cheaper to
    upgrade (price of peripherals and CPU upgrades)

  o they are more easily configured to make it difficult for kids to mess up
    the desktop (i.e. random dragging and typing doesn't result in total chaos
    the way it does on the Mac) -- though Win95 may have largely negated this
    advantage. 
 
  o you can run Linux on your PC when the kids are done with it (you can run
    it on a power Mac, too, but the kernel is newer and hence less stable).

If you get a PC, try to buy a generic clone from a local dealer, rather than a
mail-order brand-name system that may have proprietary components and cost you
more to repair.
-- 
 /   Steve Savitzky   \ Cyberspace: an alternate universe where magic works /__
/ h:steve@starport.com \    http://www.starport.com/people/steve/          /___
\ w:steve@crc.ricoh.com/   http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/          \___
 \____ Kids' page: ___/__ http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/kids.html __\__

Troy Shinbrot wrote:
> 
> In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
> Digh) wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> >         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> > I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> > The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> > yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> > I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> > brand that would be good.


> I have two things to say.  First, this is a religious issue.  Brace
> yourself for evangelical responses from both camps.  

This is soooo true!!!!!

I personally prefer Macs and that is what I have.  My kids use it all
the time.  My husband and my ex-husband both have IBM comp. the kids can
use those to.  The MAC is definately more user friendly (IMHO Windows 95
is a paltry comparison to MACs interface, but that is just evangelgal
rantings on my part), but in any event my children don't have much
trouble switching back and forth.  

There is plenty of children't software available for children, you just
have to look harder for it, since many stores don't carry it.  It is
easiest to order it.  But my son just brought home a software order form
from school that was produced by one of the book order companies.  It
was all children's software, and only two titles on the whole list were
unavailable for MAC through this company.

The most important thing is to get them comfortable with using a
computer--any computer.  So much will have changed by the time they get
into the job force it really doesn't matter what computers they learn
on, just so long as they learn that computers are our friends.
:-)

> And then buy the mac (my religious preference; YMMV).

I would have to agree :-)

Peace...
Kristin

In article <johnd-0410962126130001@pm0a10.bratt.sover.net> johnd@sover.net (John Donaldson) writes:

   Let me answer this as a first grade teacher that teaches technology as a
   steady part of my curriculum - no question - The Mac. Yes there is more PC
   software, but most of it is awful. The Mac is great for file saving, the
   Internet and the best program for young children - Kid Pix. The ease of
   use, and don't listen to people that tell you Windows '95 is easier, I am
   biplatformal and I know it's not, is worth the price.

We have KidPix on the Mac and KidPix Studio on the PC -- at this point I don't
think there are more than a small handful of kids' programs available for the
Mac that are not also available on the PC.  The reverse is emphatically not
true.  It used to be the case that innovative software came out first on the
Mac and later (if ever) on the PC; that's not true anymore either.

As has been pointed out several times, the ease-of-use question is a religious
issue.  I am considerably more than biplatformal, having used most major OS's
and many minor ones since the early 1960's; personally I can't stand *either*
the Mac *or* Windows, mainly because of the click-to-type misfeature, the
dumbed-down scrollbars, the vast amounts of screen space wasted by window
frames, and general lack of configurability.  I'll stick to Linux.

This doesn't keep my kids from being equally proficient with Windows and
MacOS, and from using Linux when they want to surf the Internet or send
e-mail. 


-- 
 /   Steve Savitzky   \ Cyberspace: an alternate universe where magic works /__
/ h:steve@starport.com \    http://www.starport.com/people/steve/          /___
\ w:steve@crc.ricoh.com/   http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/          \___
 \____ Kids' page: ___/__ http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/kids.html __\__

>> I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old. I'm
>> not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be
>> best.

In customer satisfaction studies, the Mac consistently rates higher in
user productivity, overall satisfaction, ease of use, creativity, and
other areas.

I'd go for the Mac any day. We've owned several Macs, and keep returning
to buy more. Repeat customers are a good indication of satisfaction,
too.
-- 
Jan K. France

Andy D. Digh (digh@cs.utk.edu) wrote:
> Hello,

> 	I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> brand that would be good.

For a five-year old, getting a high-powered computer is not that
important. If you plan to use it yourself, you'll have to look into it a
bit, but for a young kid...pretty much anything. Go for second-hand. Keep
an eye out for people unloading old computers, because they'll usually
offer the whole system plus software for a great price.

And now for my personal bias: I grew up on a Commodore VIC-20 and later, a
64. Software for these computers is no longer available, but if you can
find someone selling an old system, they will usually be selling all the
software too. There were lots of good children's programs written for the
64. And speaking of programs...most Commodore machines run on BASIC, which
is easy to learn. I could program at the age of 10 (won a few programmig
contests!) and my 12-year-old brother, almost before he started school.

If you're going to use the computer yourself for more high-powered
applications, I'd say an IBM or clone. There is more software and PCs are,
for the most part, industry standard. For a five-year-old, this won't
matter because whatever s/he's using now will be beyond obsolete when s/he
gets to college or the workforce. But if you plan to use it, it could make
a huge difference.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erin Coe	        |     Science: Why things work   
Carleton U. Mechie      |     Engineering: How things work
31st Ottawa Guides      |     Management: When things work
ecoe@chat.carleton.ca   |     Arts: Would you like some fries with that?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Erin Coe wrote:
> 
> Andy D. Digh (digh@cs.utk.edu) wrote:
> > Hello,
> 
> >       I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> > I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> > The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> > yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> > I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> > brand that would be good.
> 
> For a five-year old, getting a high-powered computer is not that
> important. If you plan to use it yourself, you'll have to look into it a
> bit, but for a young kid...pretty much anything. Go for second-hand. Keep
> an eye out for people unloading old computers, because they'll usually
> offer the whole system plus software for a great price.

This is actually not true. The kid's software runs agonizingly slow on
a low power computer, and the kids get antsy waiting for the screen to
fill or the sound to start. A business user running spreadsheets and
word processing actually can use a lower powered machine than a kid's
machine.

Stay away from Apple machines. The lack of software is the over riding
concern, but the high cost of peripherals is another issue. It is doubtful
if Apple will be in business for much longer either.

Stephen R. Savitzky (steve@starport.COM) wrote:
: 
: If you get a PC, try to buy a generic clone from a local dealer, 
: rather than a mail-order brand-name system that may have 
: proprietary components and cost you more to repair.

        But if you get a "generic clone," be sure that you do your 
research.  Much of what is out there at the electronic superstores
are of very poor quality.  If you're going with PCs, look at PC Mag
or PC World or some other source which rates the services of each.

        As for PC or Mac, I have a PC and love it, but I also 
do not feel that there is a huge difference, especially considering
your purpose.  It may help to look at what your district is doing.
Mine, which is the large, Greater Louisville school system, offers
both PowerMacs and Compaqs for each school.  My school, which is
upgrading in the next few months, went with the Macs, simply because
the overall package is better.  But if you're in a smaller district, 
then it may be the same across the board.


                                                        P. Tierney

In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
Digh) wrote:

>Hello,
>
>        I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
>I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
>The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
>yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
>I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
>brand that would be good.

I'm partial to Macs but will try to be open about this <g>

My suggestion is to browse the software first then go with the system that
supports most of the applications you plan to run.

-- 

AJ
^ ^
 ~

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
"The smallest deed is greater than the grandest intention."
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Patrick Joseph Tierney (pjtier01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu) wrote:
: Stephen R. Savitzky (steve@starport.COM) wrote:
: : 
: : If you get a PC, try to buy a generic clone from a local dealer, 
: : rather than a mail-order brand-name system that may have 
: : proprietary components and cost you more to repair.

:         But if you get a "generic clone," be sure that you do your 
: research.  Much of what is out there at the electronic superstores
: are of very poor quality.  If you're going with PCs, look at PC Mag
: or PC World or some other source which rates the services of each.

This is very true. I used to avoid the generic clones like the plague
because they inevitably came with the absolute worst quality motherboard,
add on cards, and peripherals. You could always upgrade each piece to
something reasonable, IF you knew what to ask for, but the reality is
that few people knew anything, even those that thought they did! Find
someone that knows something and take them with you.

Lately I've seen that some stores around Silicon Valley have gotten their
act together. First, their is the mass migration to the new ATX form factor
motherboard so even generic clones can have options like the PS/2 mouse.
Second, they have begun to use quality motherboards, since initially the
really junky motherboards are not available in the ATX form factor (nor
are the really junky power supplies and cases). The Intel Marl (Pentium)
and Intel Venus (Pentium Pro) have become defacto standards for the ATX
motherboards, and both are excellent boards.

The small stores will also let you upgrade the keyboard, mouse, or any
other component, though many of the mail order places will do the same.

On Saturday I ordered a system for my sister-in-law, an Intel Venus Pentium
Pro 200 with 32MB EDO, Creative Labs 32 Sound Blaster card, Diamond Stealth
video, 8X CD, 2GB HDD, USR Sportster 33.6 (not Winmodem), Logitech PS/2 mouse
(they did not carry the Microsoft PS/2 mouse), and Microsoft Natural Keyboard.
The price was about $2250 without monitor. For this price I could only buy a
name brand system with 16MB and a 133 or 150 Mhz Pentium. This system is really
overkill for her and her 3 year old, but with memory prices heading up, and CPU
prices not scheduled to fall for a while, it will delay upgrading for several
years. I wanted her to wait for the P55 MMX, but she didn't want to.

These systems still lack FCC certification, and are not UL or CSA listed.

Although I'm a Mac bigot, I'd be tempted to suggest that you get a
computer that a neighbour/friend/workmate will help you with if things go
wrong. That is, unless your local computer store gives you a good price,
and good service (not just promises).

Computers can and will go wrong. 

If none of the above apply, get a Mac. . .

In article <325731B0.73C2@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
<chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

 
> This is actually not true. The kid's software runs agonizingly slow on
> a low power computer, and the kids get antsy waiting for the screen to
> fill or the sound to start. A business user running spreadsheets and
> word processing actually can use a lower powered machine than a kid's
> machine.

Yes, but last year's screamer is this year's has-been... I think that there
are some great deals to be had in the used computer market.


> 
> Stay away from Apple machines. The lack of software is the over riding
> concern, but the high cost of peripherals is another issue. It is doubtful
> if Apple will be in business for much longer either.


I won't waste everyone's time going into details, but none of these
statements is supported by the facts. 

-Franklin Tessler, MD

Karen Chiu wrote:

> Stay away from Apple machines. The lack of software is the over riding
> concern, but the high cost of peripherals is another issue. It is doubtfu=
l
> if Apple will be in business for much longer either.

No!  Go buy a Mac OS machine.  Most software is available in both main oper=
ating =

system, and you can run anything on a Mac, including Win95 as OS.  Install =
"At Ease" =

for the children to use it, and have today the compter of tomorrow!

En ce qui concerne la survabilit=E9 d'Apple, elle est remise en doute d'ann=
=E9e en ann=E9e =

par les adeptes de Microsoft, inmanquablement.  Pourquoi?  Jalousie envers =
une belle =

machine en avance sur son temps?  Vis=E9es h=E9m=E9moniques =E0 la Bill Gat=
es?
Qui sait?  ;-)

Nicolas

In article <DyxFvG.Eq1@nsc.nsc.com>, scharf@mirage.nsc.com (Steven M.
Scharf) wrote:


> On Saturday I ordered a system for my sister-in-law, an Intel Venus Pentium
> Pro 200 with 32MB EDO, Creative Labs 32 Sound Blaster card, Diamond Stealth
> video, 8X CD, 2GB HDD, USR Sportster 33.6 (not Winmodem), Logitech PS/2 mouse
> (they did not carry the Microsoft PS/2 mouse), and Microsoft Natural Keyboard.
> The price was about $2250 without monitor. For this price I could only buy a
> name brand system with 16MB and a 133 or 150 Mhz Pentium. This system is
really
> overkill for her and her 3 year old, but with memory prices heading up,
and CPU
> prices not scheduled to fall for a while, it will delay upgrading for several
> years. I wanted her to wait for the P55 MMX, but she didn't want to.
> 
> These systems still lack FCC certification, and are not UL or CSA listed.

Considering all of the reviews in the PC magazines and the reputation of
the compay I would consider Dell a name brand company.
For $2599 you get a 200Mhz, 32MB SDRAM, 512k pipeline burst cache, 3.2 GB
harddrive, 15" monitor-upgradable to 17" for $199, 2MB EDO Virge Video
Card, 8X CD, AWE32 Wave Table Card, Altec Lansing speakers, MS Office
Professional with Bookshelf for Windows 95, additional $129 for a 28.8
modem. They have a Pentium Pro 200 version with a 17" monitor and different
accessories for $2699
I am not a representitive for Dell I merely find their prices, and
reliability ratings very good. Dell has a website where you can order a PC
with the exact components that you want online, which should appeal to
those people who like to tailor the system to their exact needs. Unlike
other systems that give you software you may or may not need Dell includes
MS Office Professional on this system, if you want to do serious work the
latest version of word, excel, powerpoint, and access might come in handy. 
I do not know if you got any software with your system, and you may not
have needed any, but that is certainly a concern for a first time computer
buyer. No one should be convinced at the software's value by merely looking
at the ad for what is included or the long list of titles. If a home system
that is meant to entertain children is desired look at Apple and Compaq and
see if any of the included software will keep anyone in the family occupied
for more than 30 minutes before deciding how valuable the package is. Of
couse for many people Office is overkill and a works program would be much
better.
The price considerations between Apple and a PC clone should not be a
factor, compare what you would have to buy for the PC to bring up to the
Mac standard equipment ( sound, video, SCSI port, etc.) . I use both a PC
and a Mac and find the Mac much easier to use, and certainly easier to
manage files on. Without spending a lot of money for a very good video card
with lots of RAM the Mac will have a better quality video output, many
software titles are optimized for better color and graphics on the Mac. 
There is certainly more software for the PC, a lot of it is not very good
however ( exactly how many flight sims or doom clones does one person
need?) and there are certainly as many or more educational software titles
because of the Mac's tradtional domination in that arena� a dominance which
is quickly becoming a thing of the past. If the child is a teenager, or
younger, who seems to have an inclination to seriously get into computers
and computer gaming a PC is probably a better choice.
If anyone does not want to take their computer that seriously and wants to
get lots accomplished with it get a Mac, if they take their computer and
the graphics ability seriously also get a Mac.

-- 
   I want to be able to say of us that we saw that the United States could
not be
 turned into a gigantic Switzerland or Holland, that it could not be a hermit 
nation hiding a defenceless, feeble body within a huge shell; that it could not 
be shut up and kept from its share of the world's commerce until it was 
smothered by a power hostile to it in every conception of justice and liberty 
when it might have prevented such a fate.
Henry Cabot Lodge

> 
> > On Saturday I ordered a system for my sister-in-law, an Intel Venus Pentium
> > Pro 200 with 32MB EDO, Creative Labs 32 Sound Blaster card, Diamond Stealth
> > video, 8X CD, 2GB HDD, USR Sportster 33.6 (not Winmodem), Logitech PS/2
>  mouse
> > (they did not carry the Microsoft PS/2 mouse), and Microsoft Natural
>  Keyboard.
> > The price was about $2250 without monitor. For this price I could only buy a
> > name brand system with 16MB and a 133 or 150 Mhz Pentium. This system is
> really
> > overkill for her and her 3 year old, but with memory prices heading up,
> and CPU
> > prices not scheduled to fall for a while, it will delay upgrading for
>  several
> > years. I wanted her to wait for the P55 MMX, but she didn't want to.
> > 
> > These systems still lack FCC certification, and are not UL or CSA listed.
> 

I have a suspicion that all 200mhz systems being sold now are mmx systems.
There have been several reports published of people who have purchased 200 mhz 
systems and received an MMX system.  Is there someway you can check if your 
system is MMX?
Check out:
http://www.pcmag.com/pclabs/report/r960924a.htm
or
www.zdnet.com which points to the above link.

- Danny

NOTE: Permission to include my name and email
address on any email mailing lists is expressly
forbidden. Any violation of this will be reported
to your postmaster as a formal complaint.

Ok.....as a System Administrator I have to comment on this  *smile*
Right now...the mac is extremely easy to use. It has great hardware...the
thing that I don't like about it...is its Operating System (ya..that little
MacOS simley face) and the lac of software.

	The PC on the otherhand does apprear cryptic to some however thanks to
microsoft it has become a little easier to use, what can be harder than
pressing "START"?
	As this person stated you will be investing alot of monie in to this...I
just recently bought a high end PC (P166 64mg ram..the works) for $5,000
Now as a new user to the PC industry I wouldn't suggest such an elobrate
machine..you can easily spend 1 grand on a decent machine and then another
grand on software.
	The software titles that you would be looking for are kids
software....like "living books". I think that borderbound software does
them.

If you have more questions..you can e-mail me at: patrick_shafer@eee.org


Troy Shinbrot <shinbrot@nwu1.edu> wrote in article
<shinbrot-0410960930560001@chaos.chem-eng.nwu.edu>...
> In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
> Digh) wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> >         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> > I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> > The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> > yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> > I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> > brand that would be good.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Andy 
> 
> I have two things to say.  First, this is a religious issue.  Brace
> yourself for evangelical responses from both camps.  Second, we're
talking
> about spending several thousand dollars.  You wouldn't buy a car or
> anything else for several thousand dollars without trying it out.  Try
out
> the computers.  Sit down, spend a half hour with each and decide which
> fits your needs.  Keep the salespeople away, don't listen to anything of
> any kind under any circumstances that they say to you (you may have more
> luck at a college bookstore or, better, computer lab than another
> commercial outlet).  Just spend some time on each system doing what you
> think you'll be doing with it.
> 
> And then buy the mac (my religious preference; YMMV).
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> -Troy
> 

In article <Dz12u8.7t1@nsc.nsc.com>, scharf@mirage.nsc.com (Steven M.
Scharf) wrote:


> If you pick up an ad from a store like Fry's which sells both PC and Mac
> equipment you will soon see that indeed the peripherals are much more
> expensive. Even though the original poster has the same name as me, I don't
> agree with her other statements completely. The better software does make
> it to the Macintosh platform eventually, and the lower quality stuff is
> filtered out by the marketplace, i.e. if it isn't a hit on the PC it
> won't be ported, so this might even be a plus.

The problem with Fry's is not only that they are not the cheapest or best
place to get things for the Mac, mail order which becomes almost a
neccesity for good prices and variety in the Mac market, it is also
misleading because of the differences between the platforms. Mac
peripherals that are going to be plugged into the back of the machine are
going to be more expensive than PC cards or drives that are going to be
inserted into the machine. Some people would rather have them installed
some would rather have them as accessories outside, the prices are the same
for zip or jaz drives if they are external. I personally like having a SCSI
port and an ethernet port standard. The difference between printers and
monitors is definitely real, but the quality is also, including the fact
that a laser printer should be a postscript printer for the Mac and an
added feature for the PC.
There are definitely some very inexpensive, or cheap, peripherals that can
be found for the PC and not the Mac, many if not most of these are very low
quality knock-offs. You get what you pay for.

-- 
   I want to be able to say of us that we saw that the United States could
not be
 turned into a gigantic Switzerland or Holland, that it could not be a hermit 
nation hiding a defenceless, feeble body within a huge shell; that it could not 
be shut up and kept from its share of the world's commerce until it was 
smothered by a power hostile to it in every conception of justice and liberty 
when it might have prevented such a fate.
Henry Cabot Lodge

If you are looking for a computer from a company that isn't scheduled to go
bankrupt soon, buy a PC.  However, buying a PC is much more complicated
than buying a Mac.  I would recommend buying "Computer Shopper"   You can
find it in most news stands and computer stores, and I've even seen it on
some grocery store shelves.  It is always the thickest and heaviest
magazine in the store.  Then, decide what features you want:
1) Are you looking to buy a computer that will cost less now, but will be
obsolete in a few years, or do you want to pay a few extra $$$ and get a
really good system that will last your for 4 or 5 years?
 	Either way, don't even think about getting something less than a P133
with 16 megs of RAM.  If you 	want a system that will last longer, give
some consideration to a Pentium Pro, but don't get 	anything less than a
Pentium 200.
2) Are you planning on doing any graphics or number crunching?
	If yes, make sure to get 32 megs of RAM-- at $5/meg, it is very cheap now.
3) Will the computer be used to run games?
	If so, get a good sound card (32 bit is the best) and a fast CD-ROM (8x
are relatively cheap now.. 	don't settle for anything less than 6x)
4) Will the computer be used to surf the Net?
	If you have these plans in mind, consider getting a 33.6 modem.  Even if
there are no ISPs in your 	area that support 33.6 modems, they will upgrade
soon.  New technologies like ISDN and cable 	modems aren't for mainstream
markets yet, so don't invest in them yet.  They are always easy to 	add
afterwards.

Also, give some consideration to getting a SCSI 2 machine.  This will mean
higher prices, but the peripherals are plug and play, and they usually run
faster than EIDE.  Also, ask the company that you are getting your computer
from to use 16 meg SIMMS.  When I got my computer, it came with 8 MB of
RAM, all in 1 MB SIMMS, and filling in all available memory slots.  Now I'm
not able to add more RAM because of this.  Zip drives are really nice, but
only if you use 2 or more computers and need to exchange files between them
often.  Floppies are defiantly out.  As for processor speed, the higher the
better.  166 is very common now, with 200 MHz becoming more and more
popular.  Also, depending on the prices, get 2 or 4 megs of RAM on your
video card.  As for a monitor, all work fine.  14" are very uncommon now,
and 15" are standard.  NEC makes some really nice monitors, but they cost
more.  

Anyway, call some companies with ads in Computer Shopper.  Most
salespersons are knowledgeable, but some can be a little pushy.  

Good luck with your purchase.
Yinon Bentor
yinon@boone.net

Yinon Bentor wrote:
> 
> If you are looking for a computer from a company that isn't scheduled to go
> bankrupt soon, buy a PC.  However, buying a PC is much more complicated

Actually, a lot of small "no name" computer vendors disappear every year.
Fortunately, the pieces that make up a PC are commodity items and can be purchased
everywhere.  If you are a person who needs "technical support", that can be
hard to find.  Your best bet is to find is to find a friend who is a computer nut,
feed him lots of brownies, and have him over when things don't work just right.

> than buying a Mac.  I would recommend buying "Computer Shopper"   You can
> find it in most news stands and computer stores, and I've even seen it on
> some grocery store shelves.  It is always the thickest and heaviest
> magazine in the store.  Then, decide what features you want:

There are a miriad of possible components.  Give up trying to buy the best, since
that's a moving target.  Buy what meets your needs.

> 1) Are you looking to buy a computer that will cost less now, but will be
> obsolete in a few years, or do you want to pay a few extra $$$ and get a
> really good system that will last your for 4 or 5 years?

Depends on your definition.  I've got a freind who util two weeks ago was plugging
along on a 386DX-20 based machine.  He played games, ran windows, surfed the web,
and let his children use it.  Now, I've helped him upgrade to a 486DX40.  He's as
pleased as punch.  Still does the same things, but now its faster.  Soon he'll try
some things that wouldn't run well on the old 386.  I define obsolete as being
generally unable to run current software, not just unable to run the lastest and
greatest game at 30 frames per second.

>         Either way, don't even think about getting something less than a P133
> with 16 megs of RAM.  If you    want a system that will last longer, give
> some consideration to a Pentium Pro, but don't get      anything less than a
> Pentium 200.

I'd say that I'd put the bottom limit at a P100 (that's what I've got), or if you
really, really don't have the money, an AMD5x86-133 (the fastest 486).  Jumping
to a Pentium 200 or a PPro (180/200) is a big cost jump, and I don't thing that
the price today warrents it unless you need the power now.  Remember that the
speed difference from a P75 to a P100 is large.  P100 to P133 is medium.  P133 to
P166 is small.  And P166 to P200?  Not worth it at todays prices.  If you'd like
to know all the technical details, contact me directly.

> 2) Are you planning on doing any graphics or number crunching?
>         If yes, make sure to get 32 megs of RAM-- at $5/meg, it is very cheap now.

RAM is still at historical lows.  Definitely get 16 MegaBytes.  Number crunching has
nothing to do with RAM.  Large graphics and piggy applications like MS Office run
faster with more memory.  (This assumes you run some version of MS Windows.  Apps
slow down when the amount of memory is to small to contain them and a part of the
app must be temporarily written to disk and retreived from disk.  The "disk swapping"
is what slows down the application.)

> 3) Will the computer be used to run games?
>         If so, get a good sound card (32 bit is the best) and a fast CD-ROM (8x
> are relatively cheap now..      don't settle for anything less than 6x)

Or children's applications.  Children's software is filled with delightful
(annoying?) sounds to help keep their attention.  Definitely get a sound card.  An
8 bit Soundblaster will work fine.  If you care about sound quality get a 16 bit
Soundblaster or compatible.  There are no 32 bit cards.  The 32 refers to the number
of voices.  Cheaper cards typically do 20 voices, more expensive do 32.  Wave table
synthesis cards will make real instruments sound real, rather than like really nice
electronic instruments.

I agree that at todays prices a 6X CD-ROM should be the starting point.  If the
price difference is less than %30, consider the 8X.  Still, everything available
today runs pretty well with a 4X.  My childrens machine has a perfectly usable 2X,
while I have a 6X that spends most of its time loafing.  (i.e. it has no problem
keeping up)

> 4) Will the computer be used to surf the Net?
>         If you have these plans in mind, consider getting a 33.6 modem.  Even if
> there are no ISPs in your       area that support 33.6 modems, they will upgrade
> soon.  New technologies like ISDN and cable     modems aren't for mainstream
> markets yet, so don't invest in them yet.  They are always easy to      add
> afterwards.
> 

At a minimum, get a 28.8 upgradable to 33.6.  I've surfed with a 14.4 for a year.
It's doable, but it teaches patience.  (Hmmm... not such a bad idea.)  The 28.8
was a welcome upgrade.  33.6 is not universally available yet, but it will be
soon.  Forget ISDN and cable modems for now.  A few years will show how the
market shakes out.  Maybe it will be ADSL.

> Also, give some consideration to getting a SCSI 2 machine.  This will mean
> higher prices, but the peripherals are plug and play, and they usually run
> faster than EIDE.  Also, ask the company that you are getting your computer

For the cost conscious buy caring about a machine for typical home and children
use, forget the SCSI.  Considerably more expensive and EIDE devices are plenty
fast.  Trust me.  You'll wish you had an extra Gig of hard drive long before you'll
want the extra speed SCSI will give you.  As for Plug and Play:  unless you are a
PC whiz like me, get a Plug and Play capable motherboard/bios and use a Plug and
Play OS like Windows 95.  My pentium 100 is my first Plug and Play machine and
these things could put me out of my job helping my friends.  The BIOS/Win95 has
recognized and configure my Ethernet cards, three video cards, and two sound cards
all correctly.  New BIOS (oh, that's the Basic Input/Output System-what lets the
PC boot an operating system off a disk) automatically detect your new hard drive
type and configure the parameters to access it.  Its really gotten easy.  Not
perfect, and not quite MAC, but easy compared to the "old" days.

> from to use 16 meg SIMMS.  When I got my computer, it came with 8 MB of
> RAM, all in 1 MB SIMMS, and filling in all available memory slots.  Now I'm

Definitely make sure you have room for two more RAM devices.  For example, start
with 2 8's to make a total of 16.  This leaves room for an additional pair of 8s
or even 16s if you need them someday.  (all new Pentiums require RAM SIMMs to be
added in pairs).  Most Pentium motherboards have 4 SIMM sockets, some have 6.

> not able to add more RAM because of this.  Zip drives are really nice, but
> only if you use 2 or more computers and need to exchange files between them
> often.  Floppies are defiantly out.  

Here, here.  Also consider the Zip drive or its competitors as an alternative to
a tape drive for backups.  Backups?  If you keep any information you care about
and that you provided (documents, financials, whatever) on your computer,  BACK IT
UP.  NOW.  There are two kinds of data.  Data you don't care about, and data you
lost.

>As for processor speed, the higher the
> better.  166 is very common now, with 200 MHz becoming more and more

True.  But the speed increase per processor step is not nearly as big as you might
think at the high end.  (I'm assuming that all other parts of the system are the
same.)

> popular.  Also, depending on the prices, get 2 or 4 megs of RAM on your
> video card.  

Get at least two.  This will allow you to see graphics on the Web or in applications
as they really look.

>As for a monitor, all work fine.  14" are very uncommon now,
> and 15" are standard.  NEC makes some really nice monitors, but they cost
> more.
> 

I'd recommend a 15" monitor using an 800x600 working resolution as the starting
point.  640x480 doesn't let you see enough on the screen.  A 14" monitor is too
small to use comfortable at more than 640x480 unless you are still sharp eyed.
Most children's software runs at 640x480, so at 800x600, it only fills a portion
of your screen (under Windows), but this is fine.  Most children's software
requires 8 bit color (256 color mode).  So if you, like me, prefer to work at
16 bit (64k colors) or 24 bit (16million colors), you'll need to get good at
switching your mode back and forth.  TIP:  On the Microsoft web site, and elsewhere,
you can find the Microsoft Power Tools.  These are little tools the developers of
Win95 use, but aren't in Windows95.  The best is a little program which gives you
a little monitor on your Win95 status bar that allows you to switch between any of
your system's video modes (resolution and color depth) without having to restart
windows.

> Anyway, call some companies with ads in Computer Shopper.  Most
> salespersons are knowledgeable, but some can be a little pushy.
> 
> Good luck with your purchase.
> Yinon Bentor
> yinon@boone.net

Good luck as well,

-- 
Dan (Woj...)
dmaster@lucent.com
==========================================================================
"I felt so symbolic, yesterday.
"If I knew Picasso,
"I'd buy myself a grey guitar and play.
==========================================================================

If you were asking for an adult, I would say, definitely a Macinstosh. 
They are much easier to use productively.  For a child get whatever you want.
They'll learn it. 

Bob Jones

On 4 Oct 1996, Andy D. Digh wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> 	I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
<snip>

In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.961010114353.11268B-100000-100000@east>, Bob
Jones <bjones@east.slc.k12.ut.us> wrote:

> If you were asking for an adult, I would say, definitely a Macinstosh. 
> They are much easier to use productively.  For a child get whatever you want.
> They'll learn it. 
> 
> Bob Jones
> 
> On 4 Oct 1996, Andy D. Digh wrote:
> 
> > Hello,
> > 
> >       I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> > I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> <snip>

I agree wholeheartedly!
Doesn't matter whether it's for a child or an adult...buy a mac. They're
easier to use, have less problems, and the computer doesn't get in the way
of the work you might be trying to do.

-- 
Damien Morgan
St.Arnaud, Victoria, Australia
dmorgan@ruralnet.net.au

Dan Wojciechowski <Dan.R.Wojciechowski@lucent.com> wrote:

> Yinon Bentor wrote:
> > 
> > If you are looking for a computer from a company that isn't scheduled to go
> > bankrupt soon, buy a PC.  However, buying a PC is much more complicated
> 
> Actually, a lot of small "no name" computer vendors disappear every year.
> Fortunately, the pieces that make up a PC are commodity items and can be purchased
> everywhere.  If you are a person who needs "technical support", that can be
> hard to find.  Your best bet is to find is to find a friend who is a computer nut,
> feed him lots of brownies, and have him over when things don't work just right.

[... much more omitted...]

I was about to post a note to this thread when I read Dan's note.

Starting with the above, and going right through the whole (very long)
thing, I came to the conclusion that he's my lost twin.  If you didn't
read all of Dan's note, go back and do so.  He's right on the money
the whole way.  "200MHz Pentium" indeed!!!  <pah!>

But the point about "find a friend" is the most important part.  I
have 20 years in the computer field, I do troubleshooting,
hardware/software debugging, etc.  I'm no newbie.  And *I* have a
"friend" who follows the PC trends better than I.  You'll save a LOT
of money and time and hassle if you have a pathfinder to help.

You should first get a friend, and ply them with brownies.  Then ask
their opinion, not ours.  Because when the damned thing breaks (and
they all do) you won't be able to email us, but you'll still be able
to bake brownies for your friend...!

Dan, great note!  I just upgraded my neighbor's 486SX/25 to 850MB disk
and 12MB RAM, and he (and his 10yo) are thrilled at what $200 got
them.  They went out and bought new software.  And didn't have to
spend the $2000 everyone seems to think they must.

	-gus

--
Unsolicited advertising cheerfully returned to your postmaster.

Gus Altobello, Jr.
Play: alto@li.net             Work: gus.altobello@reuters.com

I think you people are cutting off the child here.  I started with a 8086
4.77 MHz PC when I was 8 and almost 10 years later I'm soaring to new
heights that I could never have obtained on a Mac.  I'm studying to become
a CNE (Certified Novell Engineer), I do contract programming, and more! 
I'd recommend a PC, it allows the child to explore more.

Colin

Danny & Norma wrote:
> 
> I saw a study that showed people more productive with the windows 95 .vs.
> the macintosh.  I posted a message about that here a year ago.  Studies that
> show that the macintosh are more productive were done prior to windows 95.
> The Gartner group use to say that it was cheaper to own a macintosh because
> of the support costs.  They know say a PC is cheaper.
> This is very true. However note that Apple announced this past week that they
will be offering Windows NT on some of their systems next year. I don't know
if this is only on the machines targeted to the corporate marketplace (where
NT use is skyrocketing and Mac use is decreasing) or across the board. However
you probably will NOT be able to take a piece of NT software intended for an
Intel platform, and run it on a Mac, the software will have two different
versions (though software companies will likely include both versions on
the CD-ROM, provided it isn't a lot of work to recompile it for the Mac).

(I look forward to NT on the Mac because at work the main drawback to the Mac,
is how poor the networking is on it, and communicating with Mac users is limited
to simple e-mail).

Support costs are no longer really an issue on the PC, IF you buy a fully
configured machine with everything you need. It IS easier to add hardware
to the Mac, and PC owners go crazy when having to add hardware and deal
with IRQs, DMAs, and I/O addresses. Plug and Play on the PC hasn't helped
very much either. But most PCs sold theses days have everything a home user
needs, and there isn't a lot of need for any add-in cards. The cost of PC
add-on hardware is much less due to competition, which may also be an issue
to some people (it used to be said that the extra cost of Mac stuff was more
than offset by the lower support and training costs, but not anymore).

The main issue is really software. Read any article, any ad, for software,
and when new titles are announced, there's often a caveat 'not all titles
available for Mac,' or something similar. But the flip side is that only
the really good titles make it to the Mac, so it's kind of a built in
filtering mechanism.

I work with a MAC and I have always own an IBM.  My reccommendation: 
Both machines have virtually the same abilities.  However, the MAC,
IMHO, is the easier format for younger children.  That is why I highly
support it for the primary and elementary levels.  And with the hybrid
CDroms that have increased by leaps and bounds.  You have the equal
choice of software for both OSs.  Besides with the way technology
grows.  As your child gets older you may wish to upgrade, then switch to
an IBM.  I feel its worth knowing both systems.

It's all personal opinion and nothing more.

I saw a study that showed people more productive with the windows 95 .vs.
the macintosh.  I posted a message about that here a year ago.  Studies that
show that the macintosh are more productive were done prior to windows 95.
The Gartner group use to say that it was cheaper to own a macintosh because
of the support costs.  They know say a PC is cheaper.

- DC

In article <dmorgan-1110961049540001@charlton-ppp7.ruralnet.net.au>, 
dmorgan@ruralnet.net.au (Damien Morgan) wrote:
> 
> In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.961010114353.11268B-100000-100000@east>, Bob
> Jones <bjones@east.slc.k12.ut.us> wrote:
> 
> > If you were asking for an adult, I would say, definitely a Macinstosh. 
> > They are much easier to use productively.  For a child get whatever you
>  want.
> > They'll learn it. 
> > 
> > Bob Jones
> > 
> > On 4 Oct 1996, Andy D. Digh wrote:
> > 
> 
> I agree wholeheartedly!
> Doesn't matter whether it's for a child or an adult...buy a mac. They're
> easier to use, have less problems, and the computer doesn't get in the way
> of the work you might be trying to do.
> 

NOTE: Permission to include my name and email
address on any email mailing lists is expressly
forbidden. Any violation of this will be reported
to your postmaster as a formal complaint.

Currently, and I mean TODAY, it doesn't really matter which type of
computer you buy. One may be cheaper today, but tomorrow that will
change, and it will change again next week.

USABILITY:
BOTH are easy to use. Yes, some studies indicate that Windows 95 is
easier to use to a first time user, but not if you've been using Mac
software for years. In reverse, the Windows user will find Mac software
more difficult. This is just because we all grow used to one system,
develope unconscious habits, and it is our nature (darned humanoids) to
resist change.

SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY:
If you know WHERE to look you can purchase software for either platform
at the same time. The major exception to this is Microsoft software.
They live in a PC-dominated society. (Heck, they even try to convince us
that mainframes, and minicomputers are dead issues).

EASE-OF-UPGRADES:
Plug-and-Play works (on the newest systems). Plug-and-PRAY works on PCs
over one year old. The only time that PNP has been found not to work in
the last year or so is when either A) the PC manufacturer did not follow
PNP standards precisely; or B) the manufacturer of the upgraded item did
not follow PNP standards precisely. Also, PNP does NOT work well on
networked PCs. It is very difficult to get PCs using different versions
of operating systems to talk well together. Most networks are not using
ONE computer type. They mix manufacturers (IBM, Dell, Gateway, Acer) and
they mix operating systems (Windows 3.1; Windows 95; Macintosh;
PowerMac; etc...).

WHICH TO BUY: (TRY NOT TO MIX COMPUTERS AT WORK & HOME)
Best advice for anyone buying a computer at home is to look at EVERYONE
who is going to use that computer. Do mom and dad use computers at work
AND will they be bringing work home? If they do, buy a computer using
the same operating software (Mac/Windows) as the computers at work. If
mom and dad are not using computers at work, or are not going to bring
work home, then look at what the children use at school. If your
child/children all use the same type of computer at school, then buy the
computer the school is using. If the child is in elementary school and
ready to move to middle school next year, buy what the middle school is
using. If one child is using PCs in high school or college, and another
child uses Macs in middle school, then you have a tougher choice. At
that point talk with a computer consultant in your area. They will
probably give you a few minutes free, and have an excellent idea of what
the local businesses (where you children will eventually work) are using
the most of. 

Sincerely,
Douglas Knoerr
Computer Consultant / Fox Valley WI

Doug wrote:
> 
> Currently, and I mean TODAY, it doesn't really matter which type of
> computer you buy. One may be cheaper today, but tomorrow that will
> change, and it will change again next week.
> 
> USABILITY:
> BOTH are easy to use. Yes, some studies indicate that Windows 95 is
> easier to use to a first time user, but not if you've been using Mac
> software for years. In reverse, the Windows user will find Mac software
> more difficult. This is just because we all grow used to one system,
> develope unconscious habits, and it is our nature (darned humanoids) to
> resist change.
> 
> SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY:
> If you know WHERE to look you can purchase software for either platform
> at the same time. The major exception to this is Microsoft software.
> They live in a PC-dominated society. (Heck, they even try to convince us
> that mainframes, and minicomputers are dead issues).

For extremely popular titles this is true, but titles that have not yet
become hits become available for Windows first, even if the author fully
intends to port it to the Mac. They don't want to delay introduction while
working on the Mac version.
 
> EASE-OF-UPGRADES:
> Plug-and-Play works (on the newest systems). Plug-and-PRAY works on PCs
> over one year old. The only time that PNP has been found not to work in
> the last year or so is when either A) the PC manufacturer did not follow
> PNP standards precisely; or B) the manufacturer of the upgraded item did
> not follow PNP standards precisely. Also, PNP does NOT work well on
> networked PCs. 

The Plug and Play Standard has nothing to do with networks, other than
the newer network adapter cards ARE plug and play. BTW, after less than
positive experiences with PnP, I was pleased when I installed a system
for a client yesterday. It had a very new motherboard (Intel Venus) and
all recent design add-on cards and motherboards. '95 found EVERYTHING,
recognized the monitor, the 870CXI printer, and configured everything]
correctly. This was the first time I didn't have to go in and mess with
the system settings.

> It is very difficult to get PCs using different versions
> of operating systems to talk well together.

Um, no. It is a simple task to network Windows for Workgroups 3.11,
Windows 95, and Windows NT systems together. No server is even
necessary. 

What IS difficult is getting computers using completely different
operating systems to network together using real networked applications
(not just e-mail). Note that Apple will be offering  Windows NT for the
Mac next year, mainly due to the networking issue (we have to
deal with Mac/PC networking at work now, with about 3000PCs and
20 Macs, and it is a tremendous hassle, and as such further purchases
of Macs are not permitted at this time). There are some cross=platform
network applications like Lotus Notes.

In article <325FA1D6.438@awod.com>, syork@awod.com wrote:

> I work with a MAC and I have always own an IBM.  My reccommendation: 
> Both machines have virtually the same abilities.  However, the MAC,
> IMHO, is the easier format for younger children.  That is why I highly
> support it for the primary and elementary levels.  And with the hybrid
> CDroms that have increased by leaps and bounds.  You have the equal
> choice of software for both OSs.  Besides with the way technology
> grows.  As your child gets older you may wish to upgrade, then switch to
> an IBM.  I feel its worth knowing both systems.
> 
> It's all personal opinion and nothing more.

At my computer learning center, the kids use both PCs and Macs. They use
the same software on both machines (everything from Living Books to Morph
to Quarkexpress) and the software is virtually identical. The kids also
know that the many of the things they want to do, such as open, close,
save, print files and quit can be found under the File menu in the upper
left corner of both machines and that actions such as cut, paste, copy are
in the Edit menu right next to it. While they recognize there are
differences, they choose the machine's they want to use based on whether
they get to sit is a certain chair or next to a friend. The technology is
almost irrelevant to them.

I've used both ever since they were introduced, and I prefer the Mac
(greatly). However, I have long stopped trying to change people's minds
about which one they should use (my sister-in-law still regularly reminds
me that she bought a beta VCR on my recommendation). 

My most popular adult class right now is my two-hour crash course in
Windows 95. I personally think the software is a vast improvement over
Windows 3.11 but I have met dozens of people who find Win95  difficult to
comprehend and even overwhelming. I've only taught one person how to use
their Mac OS 7.5, on the other hand, in the past 6 months.

-- 
Michael Alexander
malex@kersur.net

In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net> Karen Chiu <chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> writes:

   Doug wrote:
   >                                     Also, PNP does NOT work well on
   > networked PCs. 

   The Plug and Play Standard has nothing to do with networks, other than
   the newer network adapter cards ARE plug and play.

But most network operating systems, i.e. SCO Unix, Solaris, and so on, do not
support PnP peripherals.  Linux supports it now, but you have to go out of
your way to find the necessary utilities.  

Also, it's an enormous hassle if you're mixing PnP and old peripherals; you
have to go in and fiddle with interrupts in such a way as to satisfy all the
constraints.  This usually means you can't add as many cards as you wanted to,
because PnP eats up interrupts for devices you're not using.

   > It is very difficult to get PCs using different versions
   > of operating systems to talk well together.

   Um, no. It is a simple task to network Windows for Workgroups 3.11,
   Windows 95, and Windows NT systems together. No server is even
   necessary. 

I notice a distinct lack of Win3.1 in this list.

   What IS difficult is getting computers using completely different
   operating systems to network together using real networked applications
   (not just e-mail). 

It's also simple, even trivial, to get computers networking together if you
stick to TCP/IP.  Any old 386 or higher can be a server using Linux or
FreeBSD, and you can run mail, news, WWW, FTP, telnet, the networked X Window
System, NFS, ... you name it.  There's even a free SMB server (Samba) and
appletalk server (forget the name) so you can network your old PC's and Mac's
without having to put a real operating system on them.

You do have to spend money, unfortunately, if you want to run X or NFS on your
PC or Mac.  

                      Note that Apple will be offering  Windows NT for the
   Mac next year, mainly due to the networking issue

Thereby becoming just another clonemaker, but that's another story.

                                              There are some cross=platform
   network applications like Lotus Notes.

As I mentioned, any TCP/IP based application is inherently cross-platform, and
many are available for free.  Notes is hardly something I'd consider when
deciding which computer to get for a 4-year-old, and I don't think there's any
other network application that gives a family as much the Web, which is
cross-platform and free.
-- 
 /   Steve Savitzky   \ Cyberspace: an alternate universe where magic works /__
/ h:steve@starport.com \    http://www.starport.com/people/steve/          /___
\ w:steve@crc.ricoh.com/   http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/          \___
 \____ Kids' page: ___/__ http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/kids.html __\__

In article <5325bbINNr91@duncan.cs.utk.edu>, digh@cs.utk.edu (Andy D.
Digh) wrote:

> Hello,
> 
>         I'm in the market for a computer for a five year old.
> I'm not sure whether a Macintosh or IBM compatible would be best.
> The Mac seems to be more user friendly for young children, but
> yet more children's software seems to be available for the IBM.
> I was wondering if anyone could help me out or know of a particular
> brand that would be good.
> 
> Thanks,
> Andy 

Andy,
   I would highly recommend the Mac!!  It is wonderfully friendly.  I just
bought a PowerMac 7200, and it is supposed to be able to read IBM disks.
Just an idea!!

Pamela

In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
<chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> Doug wrote:
> > 
>  
> > EASE-OF-UPGRADES:
> > Plug-and-Play works (on the newest systems). Plug-and-PRAY works on PCs
> > over one year old. The only time that PNP has been found not to work in
> > the last year or so is when either A) the PC manufacturer did not follow
> > PNP standards precisely; or B) the manufacturer of the upgraded item did
> > not follow PNP standards precisely. Also, PNP does NOT work well on
> > networked PCs. 
> 
> The Plug and Play Standard has nothing to do with networks, other than
> the newer network adapter cards ARE plug and play. BTW, after less than
> positive experiences with PnP, I was pleased when I installed a system
> for a client yesterday. It had a very new motherboard (Intel Venus) and
> all recent design add-on cards and motherboards. '95 found EVERYTHING,
> recognized the monitor, the 870CXI printer, and configured everything]
> correctly. This was the first time I didn't have to go in and mess with
> the system settings.
> 
I went through the ordeal of hooking up a peer-to-peer Win95 network using
so-called plug and play ethernet cards. To make a long story short, it took
me close to 10 solid days to finally get it all to work. The problem turned
out the the plug and play cards were configuring themselves incorrectly. I
spent countless of hours taking the cards out, reinstalling them,
reinstalling the software, checking, double checking and triple checking
the networking Win95 configuration. A real pain the in butt. Conversely,  I
set up a Mac ethernet with five Macs in under 15 minutes a couple of days
later.

-- 
Michael Alexander
malex@kersur.net

In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
<chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> Doug wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY:
> > If you know WHERE to look you can purchase software for either platform
> > at the same time. The major exception to this is Microsoft software.
> > They live in a PC-dominated society. (Heck, they even try to convince us
> > that mainframes, and minicomputers are dead issues).
> 
> For extremely popular titles this is true, but titles that have not yet
> become hits become available for Windows first, even if the author fully
> intends to port it to the Mac. They don't want to delay introduction while
> working on the Mac version.
>  
Oh, you mean, titles like, Adobe PhotoShop, Pagemaker, Illustrator,
Persuasion and Premiere? Or, KPT Bryce? Or ClarisWorks and FileMaker Pro?
Or QuarkXPress? All of these recent releases appeared on the Mac FIRST. On
a recent trip to the local CrapUSA store I noticed that virtually every
single MultiMedia or educational title was available on a cross-platform
CD. Probably because most of them were created on Macs, using either
Director or mTropolis. Or, maybe you mean those big games, which appear
first on Windoze and then, in a better, faster, bigger version on the
Macintosh? Or maybe you mean all those lame, worthless, 16 bit Windoze
applications that won't even run under Win95? I'm sorry, but the argument
you've used just doesn't fly anymore. Any software worth using is
available for both platforms. Do a little shopping, and you'll be
surprised.

- mark alan

Michael Alexander wrote:
> 
> In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
> <chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 
> >
> I went through the ordeal of hooking up a peer-to-peer Win95 network using
> so-called plug and play ethernet cards. To make a long story short, it took
> me close to 10 solid days to finally get it all to work. The problem turned
> out the the plug and play cards were configuring themselves incorrectly. 

Yeah, the first thing I do with PnP network cards and modems is to turn off
the PnP. I don't like what they configure themselves to, and I don't want
to risk that when something else is removed from the system, that they'll 
all change themselves to use the resources that were released.

> I spent countless of hours taking the cards out, reinstalling them,
> reinstalling the software, checking, double checking and triple checking
> the networking Win95 configuration. A real pain the in butt. Conversely,  I
> set up a Mac ethernet with five Macs in under 15 minutes a couple of days
> later.

I agree, a network of ONLY Macs is very easy to set up. The real problem is
how poorly Macs network with non-Macs, though Apple has finally realized the
problem, and will offer Windows NT for some of their systems next year. This
may sound like heresey, but it's the only way to get back into the corporate
marketplace.

I've found NT to be extremely stable, as is Windows '95 OSR2 (not yet released
for retail sale). OSR2 is also much faster.

Mark Alan Cirino wrote:
> 
> In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
> <chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> 
> > Doug wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > SOFTWARE AVAILABILITY:
> > > If you know WHERE to look you can purchase software for either platform
> > > at the same time. The major exception to this is Microsoft software.
> > > They live in a PC-dominated society. (Heck, they even try to convince us
> > > that mainframes, and minicomputers are dead issues).
> >
> > For extremely popular titles this is true, but titles that have not yet
> > become hits become available for Windows first, even if the author fully
> > intends to port it to the Mac. They don't want to delay introduction while
> > working on the Mac version.
> >
> Oh, you mean, titles like, Adobe PhotoShop, Pagemaker, Illustrator,
> Persuasion and Premiere? Or, KPT Bryce? Or ClarisWorks and FileMaker Pro?
> Or QuarkXPress? All of these recent releases appeared on the Mac FIRST. 

That indeed was the case in the past, as these applications ran much better
on the Mac. It is no longer the case with commercial software.

> On a recent trip to the local CrapUSA store I noticed that virtually every
> single MultiMedia or educational title was available on a cross-platform
> CD.

At Crapusa this is probably the case. However for educational software that
goes beyond games, Windows has a clear advantage. One example is in software
for foreign language learning. Most has never been ported to the Mac because
the volumes don't warrant it.

Stephen R. Savitzky wrote:
> 
> In article <326108E9.3A82@worldnet.att.net> Karen Chiu <chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> 
>    Doug wrote:
>    >                                     Also, PNP does NOT work well on
>    > networked PCs.
> 
>    The Plug and Play Standard has nothing to do with networks, other than
>    the newer network adapter cards ARE plug and play.
> 
> But most network operating systems, i.e. SCO Unix, Solaris, and so on, do not
> support PnP peripherals.  Linux supports it now, but you have to go out of
> your way to find the necessary utilities.

The number of people giving their kids a machine running Unix or a derivative,
can probably be counted on less than one hand.

Anyone running Unix is certainly intelligent enough to figure out DMAs, IRQs,
and I/O addresses.

> 
> Also, it's an enormous hassle if you're mixing PnP and old peripherals; you
> have to go in and fiddle with interrupts in such a way as to satisfy all the
> constraints.  This usually means you can't add as many cards as you wanted to,
> because PnP eats up interrupts for devices you're not using.

You can go into the device manager and remove devices you're not using, then
freeze the configuration so PnP doesn't put them back next time you power up.
I had to do this with my sound card with SCSI.
 
>    > It is very difficult to get PCs using different versions
>    > of operating systems to talk well together.
> 
>    Um, no. It is a simple task to network Windows for Workgroups 3.11,
>    Windows 95, and Windows NT systems together. No server is even
>    necessary.
> 
> I notice a distinct lack of Win3.1 in this list.

Windows 3.11 will also network fine with NT & 95. But it is true, as you stated, 
3.1 will not. The upgrade to 3.11 is pretty inexpensive.

Lest anyone think that this thread has diverged from its original purpose,
I don't believe it has. The number of multi-computer families is rising
as often parents using one machine for business or work, don't want the
kids messing with it. Yet they want to share expensive peripherals like
printers & scanners. A lot of houses have sufficient numbers of twisted
pairs in the walls to install 10BASET networking without much trouble
(a hub isn't even needed if it's only two machines).

A friend of mine has a mac 6100 with a PC card. This gives her the best of
both worlds. She did say that there were some glitches to work through;
that each side (mac vs. pc) is essentially a separate computer. You can't
run Windows while on the mac, but then you reboot and now you're running
Windows.

Just a thought...

-- 
Jo Hepner

In article <326320CD.623D@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
<chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

> 
> That indeed was the case in the past, as these applications ran much better
> on the Mac. It is no longer the case with commercial software.
> 

Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark, etc., are not "commercial software"? Funny,
they end up on the top 10 list every week!

> > On a recent trip to the local CrapUSA store I noticed that virtually every
> > single MultiMedia or educational title was available on a cross-platform
> > CD.
> 
> At Crapusa this is probably the case. However for educational software that
> goes beyond games, Windows has a clear advantage. One example is in software
> for foreign language learning. Most has never been ported to the Mac because
> the volumes don't warrant it.

Obviously, you've spent a bit too much time learning other languages on
your PC. You might want to try learning a little English, so you'll be
able to contstruct a sentence with the proper syntax. As for educational
software, I've seen the garbage that's out there. Most of it will never be
ported to the Mac, not because of small market share, but because Mac
users will not buy crappy software and most of the Windoze junk is just
plain awful. Witness CorelDraw - PC users love it, until they try
Illustrator or Freehand. After 5 years and several failed attempts, the
Corel folks finally have a Mac version that works, yet Mac users are
staying away in droves. Why? Because we only buy quality software.

As for market share, numerous studies have shown that Mac users (10%
hardware market), typically purchase twice as many software titles per
computer than PC users. And, every single cross-platform developer - even
MightGrowSoft - will tell you that the Mac is much less expensive to
support than Windoze. Uncle Bill himself has publicly state that M$ makes
more money per box on Mac software than they do on the Windoze junk, even
though the price is the same. Any company that's stupid enough to throw
away 20% of their sales is not worth supporting anyway. Again, your
arguments hold no water. The Mac is a better platform. Period.

- mark alan

In article <cirino-1510960801400001@gasupport2.island.com>,
Mark Alan Cirino <cirino@island.com> wrote:
>In article <326320CD.623D@worldnet.att.net>, Karen Chiu
><chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
...
>> At Crapusa this is probably the case. However for educational software that
>> goes beyond games, Windows has a clear advantage. One example is in software
>> for foreign language learning. Most has never been ported to the Mac because
>> the volumes don't warrant it.
>
>Obviously, you've spent a bit too much time learning other languages on
>your PC. You might want to try learning a little English, so you'll be
>able to contstruct a sentence with the proper syntax. 

Oh Mighty Mac User with infinite wisdom: please enlighten us on what was
wrong with the other person's syntax?  Me dont speak no english to good.

P.S. Language-flame is the lowest form of argument on the Internet.
--
Nai-Chi
===========================================================================
Famous anti-drug messages:
  Nancy Reagan:    "Just say NO"
  Bob Dole:        "Just DON'T do it"
  Bill Clinton:    "Just don't INHALE it"
  Hillary Clinton: "Just SAY you didn't do it"
===========================================================================

In article <32631FD4.391B@worldnet.att.net> Karen Chiu <chiu-scharf@worldnet.att.net> writes:

   The number of people giving their kids a machine running Unix or a
   derivative, can probably be counted on less than one hand.

With the increasing number of multi-PC households running Linux servers, I
doubt that this is true anymore.  I certainly wouldn't advocate making Unix
your *only* home OS, but one machine with a proxy server on it makes it
possible for everyone in the family to surf the Net at the same time..


   Anyone running Unix is certainly intelligent enough to figure out DMAs, IRQs,
   and I/O addresses.

Again, not necessarily.  Even experienced Unix system administrators can have
a lot of trouble figuring out what's happening when a new card is installed on
an old system.  Besides, the original comments a few posts back had to do with
PnP in general.  It's not called ``Plug and Pray'' for nothing.

   You can go into the device manager and remove devices you're not using, then
   freeze the configuration so PnP doesn't put them back next time you power up.
   I had to do this with my sound card with SCSI.

Which device manager?  I'm not sure Win3.1 supports this sort of thing.  I'm
quite sure it doesn't have anything in it that will let me remove the second
IDE controller, for example.

   Windows 3.11 will also network fine with NT & 95. But it is true, as you
   stated, 3.1 will not. The upgrade to 3.11 is pretty inexpensive.

I didn't think Win3.11 was still supported, but you may be right.  It has
other problems, though; I had enormous amounts of trouble installing the
Chameleon TCP/IP stack on a 3.11 machine.  Everything's fine as long as you
stay in the M$ world, but as soon as you try to add Mac and Unix to the mix
you're in trouble.

   Lest anyone think that this thread has diverged from its original purpose,
   I don't believe it has. The number of multi-computer families is rising
   as often parents using one machine for business or work, don't want the
   kids messing with it. Yet they want to share expensive peripherals like
   printers & scanners. A lot of houses have sufficient numbers of twisted
   pairs in the walls to install 10BASET networking without much trouble
   (a hub isn't even needed if it's only two machines).

I agree completely with this.  My house has 3 PC's and a MacII, and we're not
all that unusual.  As soon as you get up over two machines, it's worthwhile to
dedicate one (typically your oldest) as a server; Linux and BSD are by far
the cheapest and best-performing OS's to use in this case, since they give
acceptable performance even on machines too slow and small to even consider
running Win95 on.  This is equally true in a work or community network
situation, by the way.  I know of at least one municipal freenet built
entirely out of cast-off 386's donated by computer stores, running BSD (I
forget whether it's the Free- or Net- variety; probably FreeBSD).
-- 
 /   Steve Savitzky   \ Cyberspace: an alternate universe where magic works /__
/ h:steve@starport.com \    http://www.starport.com/people/steve/          /___
\ w:steve@crc.ricoh.com/   http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/          \___
 \____ Kids' page: ___/__ http://www.crc.ricoh.com/people/steve/kids.html __\__

Stephen R. Savitzky (steve@starport.COM) wrote:

: With the increasing number of multi-PC households running Linux servers, I
: doubt that this is true anymore.  I certainly wouldn't advocate making Unix
: your *only* home OS, but one machine with a proxy server on it makes it
: possible for everyone in the family to surf the Net at the same time..

Go for it!
http://vancouver-webpages.com/CacheNow/ - campaign for proxy cache


Somewhat divergent here - not exactly suitable for a 5 yr old, but my
first PC was a National semi. SC/MP evaluation kit. I learnt more from
running that (and building a keyboard, video card, serial interface,
tape i/f, sound card from scratch) than a year of Comp Sci at University.
I've learnt more in 6 months from running a $40 Linux system than from
10 years of using CP/M, DOS and Windows. Of course, that assumes one wants
to learn about computers rather than just use them to get something done.

I'd like something with the reliability and security of Unix, knowing that
my kids couldn't trash the system without root access, and the ease-of-use
for inexperienced users of Windows or Mac. Maybe one of the new Silicon
Graphics O2s ... If only the Windows emulators worked better ...

--

Andrew Daviel

mailto:andrew@vancouver-webpages.com 
http://vancouver-webpages.com  : home of multisearch, META generator etc.

Danny & Norma wrote:
> 
> I saw a study that showed people more productive with the windows 95 .vs.
> the macintosh.  I posted a message about that here a year ago.  Studies that
> show that the macintosh are more productive were done prior to windows 95.
> The Gartner group use to say that it was cheaper to own a macintosh because
> of the support costs.  They know say a PC is cheaper.
> 
> - DC
> 
> In article <dmorgan-1110961049540001@charlton-ppp7.ruralnet.net.au>,
> dmorgan@ruralnet.net.au (Damien Morgan) wrote:
> >
> > In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.961010114353.11268B-100000-100000@east>, Bob
> > Jones <bjones@east.slc.k12.ut.us> wrote:
> >
> > > If you were asking for an adult, I would say, definitely a Macinstosh.
> > > They are much easier to use productively.  For a child get whatever you
> >  want.
> > > They'll learn it.
> > >
> > > Bob Jones
> > >
> > > On 4 Oct 1996, Andy D. Digh wrote:
> > >
> >
> > I agree wholeheartedly!
> > Doesn't matter whether it's for a child or an adult...buy a mac. They're
> > easier to use, have less problems, and the computer doesn't get in the way
> > of the work you might be trying to do.
> >
> 
> NOTE: Permission to include my name and email
> address on any email mailing lists is expressly
> forbidden. Any violation of this will be reported
> to your postmaster as a formal complaint.

Apologies for posting to this thread late; been away, etc....

6 months ago I faced this question as well.  We had a MAC used for our business with 
all its investment in harware andsoftware, but we wanted something to run the 
educational CDRoms for the kids (no games for Dad, oh no, of course not..)

I am a firm MAC believer, but we eventually went for the PC.  This may not be 
suitable for you, but our reasoning was:

1. In the UK at least PC titles outweighted the MAC.  This is changing now, but 
still some come out PC only.

2. Again, in the UK, the MAC is very much a business machine for publishing.  PCs 
are for home and general business use.  As the MAC is more marginal here (flame 
bait, but I think it is true), I was concerned that in 3 years time, there may be no 
MAC....

3.  Local support is available more readily

4.  Perhaps the most important question that hasn't yet been mentioned.  What does 
your children's school use?  What do your friends use?  We often compare CDRoms with 
friends with PCs and this saves poor purchases.  As there is only 1 CD and you need 
it in the machine when running, I am assuming that lending a copy is kosher 
practice; but then, if we dont like it it gets deleted very immediately, and if we 
do like it we buy a copy.  In a similar vein, with more PC literate friends, I know 
I can find local help when things go wrong...and they do!

5.  As far as usability goes, I don't see an issue. Win95 and MACOS are very 
similar, and my 5 year old can run titles unaided for hours.

I initally hated moving from the MAC, but I don't regret it.  Then again, I am not 
sure that the MAC-PC situation is the same in the UK as in the USA.

Hope it helps.

I would suggest IBM.

Does the Mac have a serious future? I'm not trying to be rude... just
remember how fast things change in the computer world. Do you really
want to invest the time, headache, money to master a MAc and build up
a library of software, when one day you may have to chnge to IBM?

The 'problems' of using an IBM are overstated. The 'ease' of using a
Mac are overstated.

I taught computing for many years, have looked at this issue hard, as
I was responsible for equipment purchase. I didn't get complaints from
employers.

Good luck!

Tom

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/TK_Boyd

Hello,

I have used both pc's and Mac's for years. At home I work with three old 
Mac, at school I have to use pc. I prefer Mac, because it is more reliable 
than any pentium pc (IBM or compatible). Win95 seems to be just a poor 
copy of MacOS. 

I use computer  for a serious work, not for fixing and customing the 
machine. All necessary programs you may need are available for Mac's or 
it's clones (Apple has licensed MacOs) (games not included). Anyway, Bill 
Gates and Microsoft control also Mac programs in some sense. There are 
some differerencies, but the average user like me would vote for Mac. After 
Mac it was very frustrating start working with Win95, because it had a very 
complex system of file managering etc. 

Yours,

Olli-Matti Selin
History teacher

P.s. Is there any school interestde in co-operation with a finnish junior 
high school specialised in communiaction and enviroment?

Olli-Matti Selin wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have used both pc's and Mac's for years. At home I work with three old
> Mac, at school I have to use pc. I prefer Mac, because it is more reliable
> than any pentium pc (IBM or compatible). Win95 seems to be just a poor
> copy of MacOS.
> 
> I use computer  for a serious work, not for fixing and customing the
> machine. All necessary programs you may need are available for Mac's or
> it's clones (Apple has licensed MacOs) (games not included). Anyway, Bill
> Gates and Microsoft control also Mac programs in some sense. There are
> some differerencies, but the average user like me would vote for Mac. After
> Mac it was very frustrating start working with Win95, because it had a very
> complex system of file managering etc.

I suggest a Mac also.  That way, when all your _weanie_ kids -- who
can't learn how to use _anything_ that isn't simple -- get to college,
my kids will kick their butts!

Kids will learn _anything_ you give them a chance to learn.  Get 'em a
PC and run Linux and X11 on it -- if there is sufficient motivation
(i.e., "cool games"), they will figure it out.

My oldest son got his first computer when he was 3.  We had DOS/Windows
3.1 on it.  He figured it out.  He goes to school now, they have Macs. 
He shows his teachers how to work the machine.  He doesn't notice any
difference (per se) in the OS -- because to him it is just an
appliance.  He sees it much the same way our generation sees a TV or
fancy stereo.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*** These are my opinions. Mine! All Mine! Minemineminemineminemine! ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robin D. Wilson            robin@pswtech.com            PSW Technologies
701 Canyon Bend Dr.                            9050 Capital of Texas Hwy
Pflugerville, TX  78660                                Austin, TX  78759
(512) 251-1737                                            (512) 343-6666

In article <54d5i0$81g@dub-news-svc-6.compuserve.com>,
100665.1141@compuserve.com (Tom Boyd) wrote:

> I would suggest IBM.

I suggest Macintosh.
 
> Does the Mac have a serious future? I'm not trying to be rude... just
> remember how fast things change in the computer world. Do you really

People have been asking "Does the Mac have a serious future?" for over a
decade!  I can remember over 10 years ago when the Mac 1st came out, 
there were PC-users talking about how windows and icons were for
less-than-serious computer users and that the mouse & the Mac was a joke! 
But guess what?  Apparently ***Bill Gates*** thought the Mac had a
future,  because all of a sudden PC's started sprouting mice (albeit fromt
the back of the computer,  instead of from the keyboard) and having
windows and icons!

> want to invest the time, headache, money to master a MAc and build up
> a library of software, when one day you may have to chnge to IBM?

The real question is... "Do you want to invest the time,  headache, 
money,  to master a Mac-wannabe like IBM,  or do you want to spend a
little extra dough to get the real-deal!  Do you want to learn an OS that
had windows & icons from its very beginning,  or would you rather learn a
second-rate,  me-too, 10-years-after-the-fact  product like Windows 95
that's still fraught with the bugs and inconsistencies of DOS & 16-bit
software?"
 
> The 'problems' of using an IBM are overstated. The 'ease' of using a
> Mac are overstated.

That depends on who you are.  If you are a computer engineering student
with an IQ over 130,  then I would agree -- somewhat.  If you're like most
people who barely know RAM from ROM,  then the horror stories about "IBM"
are all too true,  and the ease of use of the Mac is a reality.
 
> I taught computing for many years, have looked at this issue hard, as
> I was responsible for equipment purchase. I didn't get complaints from
> employers.

If you're the guru for some place and you set up all the systems so that
they're "bullet-proof," then of course there will be no complaints.  If
you are a single mother or young person interested in getting a computer, 
buying the wrong Packard Bell at Incredible Universe could very well end
any budding interest you might ever have in computers.
 
> Good luck!

Truly,  if you're getting a PC.
 
> Tom
> 
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/TK_Boyd

Edward

-- 
Edward

In article <edodge-2610961310220001@ip-pdx18-12.teleport.com>,
edodge@teleport.com (Edward Dodge) wrote:

> In article <54d5i0$81g@dub-news-svc-6.compuserve.com>,
> 100665.1141@compuserve.com (Tom Boyd) wrote:
> 
> > I would suggest IBM.
> 
> I suggest Macintosh.

Which computer you choose as an adult is very much a decision based on
preference, I have a Mac and I love it especially when my husband is
having gremlins run amok on his Pc. But now that my two year old has taken
part possesion of the computers, I'm glad I have a Mac that I can
safeguard with At Ease(tm). I agree with Tom that kids can learn
everything, including trashing everything in sight, but I don't know of a
product that will keep a Pc safe from a toddler.
niki