🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <158@zen.BERKELEY.EDU>, c160-aw@zooey.Berkeley.EDU (Christian Wiedmann) writes:
> The whole point of the Mac is its User Interface. The strategy is to make
> all the hardships of using a computer disappear. Naturally, this also forces
> the programmer to do a lot more. 

Yes, but that is NOT the point here.  The User Interfaces are basically the same
here - window oriented, mouse driven, etc. How does it make the user interface 
better to force the programmer to work harder?  The example cited in the 
article shows a series of about 8 or 9 steps required on the Mac to resize a 
window.  On the Amiga, it was one step - the system did all the resizing, and 
just informed you about it.  The Amiga method is much better than the Mac 
method on two counts - 1. it is less work for the programmer, and 2. it 
encourages a more consistent user interface, since most people will use the 
system-supplied way rather than go to all the trouble of doing it like the Mac.

I agree that it is better to force the programmer to do all that than to be lazy
and use a DOS-type interface, but I think that if it can be done the easy way
rather than forcing programmers to do that much, so much the better.