Tech Insider					     Technology and Trends


			      USENET Archives

From: jerryd@hplsla.hp.com (Jerry Daniels)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <11820004@hplsla.hp.com>
Date: 6 Feb 92 19:21:31 GMT
Organization: HP Lake Stevens, WA
Lines: 35


I have always been a big supporter of the Macintosh.  I bought my first one 
back in 1984 when it first came out.  My evolution of Macintoshes has been
adding memory to the Mac Classic to buying my current SE and then adding 
more memory to obtain 4Mbytes.  I have always enjoyed the work discussions 
with the PC users and was somewhat smug because I used a Mac!  

Now I need (want?) more horsepower.  I want more speed, bigger discs, color,
sound, etc.  I have begun to explore my options.

Work has always been the domain of the PC and I used them but I never liked
them as well as my Mac.  Recently I needed the capability at work of using a
mathematical application program beyond its then present memory restrictions.
This dictated that I upgrade my old AT to something else.  After looking around
I obtained permission to  buy from a mail order company.  I purchased a
486 machine running at 33MHz.  I obtained a 14" color super VGA monitor, 
keyboard, 200MByte hard disc, 5.25" floppy, 3.5"floppy, DOS 5.0, and Microsoft
Windows 3.0.   The 486 of course comes with a coprocessor.  The total bill for
this was $3,000.  The speed of this machine is awsome.  The software is very
good.

Now my dilemma.  Once upon a time the Mac user interface was so much better 
than anything that the PC world had to offer that an individual could justify
paying a higher price for a Mac than something from the PC world.  This is 
no longer true.  After I have been such a strong supporter of Mac, Apple
may lose me.  I don't think that I can afford Mac any longer.  I have been 
looking at the Mac ci as the most affordable Mac that still has some of the
features that I need but I am not sure that the performance can come close
to the present low cost 486 machines. 

Can someone out there find fault with my logic.  Can you convince me that 
I should stay with the Mac?  I still think that the Mac is actually more fun
(we don't like to use that word at work) to use but money is money.

Jerry W. Daniels

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thursday, 6 Feb 1992 22:47:53 EST
From: <RVK@psuvm.psu.edu>
Message-ID: <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
References:  <11820004@hplsla.hp.com>


In article <11820004@hplsla.hp.com>, jerryd@hplsla.hp.com (Jerry Daniels) says:
>
>I have always been a big supporter of the Macintosh.  I bought my first one
>back in 1984 when it first came out.  My evolution of Macintoshes has been
>adding memory to the Mac Classic to buying my current SE and then adding
>more memory to obtain 4Mbytes.  I have always enjoyed the work discussions
>with the PC users and was somewhat smug because I used a Mac!
>
>Now I need (want?) more horsepower.  I want more speed, bigger discs, color,
>sound, etc.  I have begun to explore my options.
>
>Work has always been the domain of the PC and I used them but I never liked
>them as well as my Mac.  Recently I needed the capability at work of using a
>mathematical application program beyond its then present memory restrictions.
>This dictated that I upgrade my old AT to something else.  After looking
>around
>I obtained permission to  buy from a mail order company.  I purchased a
>486 machine running at 33MHz.  I obtained a 14" color super VGA monitor,
>keyboard, 200MByte hard disc, 5.25" floppy, 3.5"floppy, DOS 5.0, and Microsoft
>Windows 3.0.   The 486 of course comes with a coprocessor.  The total bill for
>this was $3,000.  The speed of this machine is awsome.  The software is very
>good.
>
>Now my dilemma.  Once upon a time the Mac user interface was so much better
>than anything that the PC world had to offer that an individual could justify
>paying a higher price for a Mac than something from the PC world.  This is
>no longer true.  After I have been such a strong supporter of Mac, Apple
>may lose me.  I don't think that I can afford Mac any longer.  I have been
>looking at the Mac ci as the most affordable Mac that still has some of the
>features that I need but I am not sure that the performance can come close
>to the present low cost 486 machines.
>
>Can someone out there find fault with my logic.  Can you convince me that
>I should stay with the Mac?  I still think that the Mac is actually more fun
>(we don't like to use that word at work) to use but money is money.
>
>Jerry W. Daniels
>
Jerry is absolutely right with his logic. I too was a staunch Mac fanatic, who
looked smugly at users with DOS based PCs until the Mac killer combination of
low-cost 486 33 Mhz PCs and Windows 3.0 arrived. Also Apple by killing the
SE/30 and bringing the repackaged Mac Classic II (no Math Co-processor), tiny
screen still retained, and high prices (even their academic discounted Macs
cannot compare with the 486 33 Mhz PCs on the open market for sheer value)
essentially forced students like me to consider buying a machine which I
initially dreaded (DOS caused me to have cramps). Eventhough, right now for
ease of use, my personal opinion is that System 7 is the best, but Windows 3.0
is not far behind.  With the release of Windows 3.1 on the horizon, I feel
there is further bad news for Apple and unless it does something drastic to
improve its mid-range Macs and simultaneously lower prices significantly, form-
er  Mac fanatics are going to abandon ship. (And I ask why shouldn't they ?).

Here's a snippet from the latest issue of MacWeek that does not bode well for
Apple:

"What is turning heads, however, is the reaction of Mac developers, who once
snubbed their noses at DOS technology but now are jumping on the Windows
bandwagon.
 According to industry observers, nearly every major software developer is
devoting more time and money to Windows development, based on the larger
Windows market and user demand."
 The article goes on to mention more about developers opening Windows first
and the Mac becoming a second priority. If developers think that way, I think
it's wise for even the most seasoned Mac fanatic (and I thought I was one) to
look onwards to the new bandwagon.  I hope the marketing folks at Apple are
reading this and finally try to keep their share of the market by adopting
reasonable pricing policies and not milking the mid-range user.

RVK (The former mac fanatic)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
From: edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar)
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: usenet@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: function.mps.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University, Dept. of Math.
References: <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu> <783@transfer.stratus.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1992 19:18:14 GMT
Lines: 22


One of the PC magazines (no, I was just visiting a friend who had it
on the coffee table) did a "controlled test" of various GUI's.
Guess what: Windows won, followed by Presentation Manager.
Macintosh was way down the list, along with NeXTstep and a few others.

The testers were given a list of tasks to attempt, but were not
given any instructions, and not given any documentation.
This was supposed to be related to "ease of use", I guess.

According to the text, most of the testers didn't figure out that the
apple at the top of the screen was a menu, and even when they did,
they didn't realize that "Chooser" was used to choose a printer.
So most of them failed when asked to switch printers.  And other fun things.
Also, one of the tests was "Delete a file without using the mouse".
They said that this was impossible on a Mac.  I almost wrote them
a letter saying that "Easy Access" exists, but I suppose no tester could
have figured that out without being allowed to read the manual.
--
  Gerald A. Edgar                Internet:  edgar@mps.ohio-state.edu
  Department of Mathematics      Bitnet:    EDGAR@OHSTPY
  The Ohio State University      telephone: 614-292-0395 (Office)
  Columbus, OH 43210             -292-4975 (Math. Dept.) -292-1479 (Dept. Fax)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
From: jack@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Jack Kobzeff)
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <1992Feb8.005706.7466@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Sender: news@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Usenet)
Nntp-Posting-Host: jkobseff.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab
References:  <11820004@hplsla.hp.com> <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 92 00:57:06 GMT


In article <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu>, <RVK@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> 
> In article <11820004@hplsla.hp.com>, jerryd@hplsla.hp.com (Jerry Daniels) says:
> >
> >I have always been a big supporter of the Macintosh.  I bought my first one
> >back in 1984 when it first came out.  My evolution of Macintoshes has been
> >adding memory to the Mac Classic to buying my current SE and then adding
> >more memory to obtain 4Mbytes.  I have always enjoyed the work discussions
> >with the PC users and was somewhat smug because I used a Mac!
> >
> >Now I need (want?) more horsepower.  I want more speed, bigger discs, color,
> >sound, etc.  I have begun to explore my options.
> >
> >Work has always been the domain of the PC and I used them but I never liked
> >them as well as my Mac.  Recently I needed the capability at work of using a
> >mathematical application program beyond its then present memory restrictions.
> >This dictated that I upgrade my old AT to something else.  After looking
> >around
> >I obtained permission to  buy from a mail order company.  I purchased a
> >486 machine running at 33MHz.  I obtained a 14" color super VGA monitor,
> >keyboard, 200MByte hard disc, 5.25" floppy, 3.5"floppy, DOS 5.0, and Microsoft
> >Windows 3.0.   The 486 of course comes with a coprocessor.  The total bill for
> >this was $3,000.  The speed of this machine is awsome.  The software is very
> >good.
> >
> >Now my dilemma.  Once upon a time the Mac user interface was so much better
> >than anything that the PC world had to offer that an individual could justify
> >paying a higher price for a Mac than something from the PC world.  This is
> >no longer true.  After I have been such a strong supporter of Mac, Apple
> >may lose me.  I don't think that I can afford Mac any longer.  I have been
> >looking at the Mac ci as the most affordable Mac that still has some of the
> >features that I need but I am not sure that the performance can come close
> >to the present low cost 486 machines.
> >
> >Can someone out there find fault with my logic.  Can you convince me that
> >I should stay with the Mac?  I still think that the Mac is actually more fun
> >(we don't like to use that word at work) to use but money is money.
> >
> >Jerry W. Daniels



> Jerry is absolutely right with his logic. I too was a staunch Mac fanatic, who
> looked smugly at users with DOS based PCs until the Mac killer combination of
> low-cost 486 33 Mhz PCs and Windows 3.0 arrived. Also Apple by killing the
> SE/30 and bringing the repackaged Mac Classic II (no Math Co-processor), tiny
> screen still retained, and high prices (even their academic discounted Macs
> cannot compare with the 486 33 Mhz PCs on the open market for sheer value)
> essentially forced students like me to consider buying a machine which I
> initially dreaded (DOS caused me to have cramps). Eventhough, right now for
> ease of use, my personal opinion is that System 7 is the best, but Windows 3.0
> is not far behind.  With the release of Windows 3.1 on the horizon, I feel
> there is further bad news for Apple and unless it does something drastic to
> improve its mid-range Macs and simultaneously lower prices significantly, form-
> er  Mac fanatics are going to abandon ship. (And I ask why shouldn't they ?).
> 
> Here's a snippet from the latest issue of MacWeek that does not bode well for
> Apple:
> 
> "What is turning heads, however, is the reaction of Mac developers, who once
> snubbed their noses at DOS technology but now are jumping on the Windows
> bandwagon.
>  According to industry observers, nearly every major software developer is
> devoting more time and money to Windows development, based on the larger
......

Actually, one of the biggest sources of pleasure for me over the last year
or so, has been the almost constant discovering by Windows people of facts
and techniques that Mac people learned a long time ago. 

The biggest problem with the above is that the '486/Windows combo is a short 
term 'bandwagon'. Starting next year, there is going to be a 'paradigm shift'
in the PC world, and the ACE/Apple-IBM/Portable NeXT OS/Sun-Solaris markets
are going to start. If you can wait for a year or so (yeah! right!!) you can
get in on a real bandwagon that should be as exciting as the Mac was. (Oh 
yeah, you'll also be able to run your Mac software on the Apple-IBM boxes.)

Like has always been the case, the closer you are tied to an existing 
'standard', the more likely you will resist the 'new wave'. I am also lured
by the cheap horsepower of the DOS world. But as far as I am concerned, it 
will be just as a stopgap, or a adjunct to a Mac (or whatever comes after it.)

I am pretty sure that Apple is aware of the above feelings. That is one 
reason (again I'm pretty sure, since I don't attend Apple board meetings) for
the recent price cuts. Also, there is talk of some attractive Macs coming
down the road that will have multimedia capabilities far beyond anything in 
the the Windows world. Apple can never compete in price against the 'drop the
parts in and shake the box' DOS clones. But they can and do compete against
the prices and technology of the larger clone makers.

Do I see my above statements as an airtight reason for staying with the Mac?
Nope, the cheap '486/Windows combo has made DOS very appealing. But you do 
have to take more than just the current cost of a DOS box into account if
you are looking at this as a 'bandwagon'. As a bandwagon, I have no fears for 
the Mac and its 'next generation' . If you just need a cheap box to run a
spreadsheet and word processor, DOS may very well be the best way to go for 
the short term. 

Jack Kobzeff      (jack@jato.jpl.nasa.gov)

From: freek@fwi.uva.nl (Freek Wiedijk)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <1992Feb11.142036.20756@fwi.uva.nl>
Date: 11 Feb 92 14:20:36 GMT
References: <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu> <783@transfer.stratus.com> 
<1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: news@fwi.uva.nl
Organization: FWI, University of Amsterdam
Lines: 20
Nntp-Posting-Host: halo.fwi.uva.nl


edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) writes:
>According to the text, most of the testers didn't figure out that the
>apple at the top of the screen was a menu, and even when they did,
>they didn't realize that "Chooser" was used to choose a printer.
>So most of them failed when asked to switch printers.

I have to admit that the Chooser is an abomination.

Why can't there simply be a pop-up list in the Print dialog containing
all available printers?  If that were true, you only would need the
Chooser if you wanted to change printer _type_ (which occurs probably
much less often).

Has someone ever written an INIT that added such a pop-up?

Freek (`frake') Wiedijk, self-appointed proof digitizer: freek@fwi.uva.nl
--
A man made a pact with the Devil.  The condition was this: the man
delivered up his soul as soon as Satan had assassinated God.
`Nothing simpler,' said Satan and put a revolver to his own temple.

From: lsr@Apple.COM (Larry Rosenstein)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <20256@goofy.Apple.COM>
Date: 12 Feb 92 18:41:12 GMT
References: <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu> <783@transfer.stratus.com> 
<1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Organization: Object Based Systems, Apple Computer, Inc.
Lines: 32


In article <1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu> 
edgar@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) writes:
>One of the PC magazines (no, I was just visiting a friend who had it
>on the coffee table) did a "controlled test" of various GUI's.
>Guess what: Windows won, followed by Presentation Manager.

It was billed as a GUI test, but if you read the article carefully, it was a
test of GUI's for DOS machines.  When you look at it that way, then it's not
surprising that Windows won.

>The testers were given a list of tasks to attempt, but were not

In addition there were only 10 tests, about half of whom were DOS users.

>So most of them failed when asked to switch printers.  And other fun things.
>Also, one of the tests was "Delete a file without using the mouse".

I think the exact test was to install a new printer, which doesn't really
have an equivalent on the Mac.  And they had to eliminate 2 of the tasks
because they directly related to DOS (one was somthing like "run a DOS
program). 

>They said that this was impossible on a Mac.  I almost wrote them
>a letter saying that "Easy Access" exists, but I suppose no tester could

There's supposed to be an official Apple reply to this article.  But of
course, people won't notice or recall that.

-- 
Larry Rosenstein, Apple Computer, Inc.

lsr@apple.com
(or AppleLink: Rosenstein1)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
From: lee@wang.com (Lee Story)
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Organization: Wang Laboratories, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 18 Feb 92 14:52:00
Message-ID: <LEE.92Feb18145200@meercat.wang.com>
In-Reply-To: freek@fwi.uva.nl's message of 11 Feb 92 14:20:36 GMT
References: <92037.224753RVK@psuvm.psu.edu> <783@transfer.stratus.com>
	<1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>
	<1992Feb11.142036.20756@fwi.uva.nl>
Sender: news@wang.com
Lines: 42


In article <1992Feb11.142036.20756@fwi.uva.nl> freek@fwi.uva.nl (Freek Wiedijk) 
writes:

   I have to admit that the Chooser is an abomination.

   Why can't there simply be a pop-up list in the Print dialog containing
   all available printers?  If that were true, you only would need the
   Chooser if you wanted to change printer _type_ (which occurs probably
   much less often).

The whole "Chooser" notion indeed stinks!  Why should the user have to
run a DA to accomplish an application function?  Why should the user
have to be sensitive to whether Appletalk is "turned on"?  Why should
he see a display cluttered with all network devices when selecting a
printer?

One would have assumed that with all the other improvements in System 7,
a multi-printer spooling system AND a chooser replacement would have
appeared.  I'd suggest:

   Allow simultaneous spooling to (and driving) N>>1 Appletalk and N>2
serial (with the Quadlink or other card) printers SIMULTANEOUSLY.
Make the selection of Appletalk and serial printers IDENTICAL, and do
it at the time printing takes place; to wit, have a "Printers" folder
(which could be placed anywhere, and aliased) containing the print
driver icons, and just drag and drop to print from the finder.  From
within applications, a printer list (like the file list in the
standard file dialog) in the "Print" dialog would be fine.  Perhaps
(in addition) the "Print" dialog could have an icon representing the
current document, which could be moved with the mouse and dropped onto
the desktop's printer icons.  Provide a default printer (just like Big
Brother Unix does) for repeated printings and for backward
compatibility.

  Given the problems Apple seems to have delivering reliable spooling
to ONE printer, I suppose any functional and ergonomic enhancement will
probably come from a third party (one of us) first.
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Lee Story (lee@wang.com) Wang Laboratories, Inc.
     (Boston and New Hampshire AMC, and Merrimack Valley Paddlers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: bc@Apple.COM (bill coderre)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Mac user abandons ship
Message-ID: <63006@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 20 Feb 92 19:18:13 GMT
References: <1992Feb7.191814.2979@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu> 
<1992Feb11.142036.20756@fwi.uva.nl> <LEE.92Feb18145200@meercat.wang.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA
Lines: 29


freek@fwi.uva.nl (Freek Wiedijk) writes:
|   I have to admit that the Chooser is an abomination.

lee@wang.com (Lee Story) writes:
|The whole "Chooser" notion indeed stinks!  Why should the user have to
|run a DA to accomplish an application function?  Why should the user
|have to be sensitive to whether Appletalk is "turned on"?  Why should
|he see a display cluttered with all network devices when selecting a
|printer?

Your claim isn't 100% correct, since you only see printers when you
select printers, but that's a secondary quibble.

Apple promised a new print architecture that would provide better
architecture than the current chooser/Print dialog boxes with System
7. Although that stuff didn't ship with 7.0, MacWeek, that bastion of
quality journalism, claims it will ship soon.

I certainly don't have any info on this myself.

Incidentally, just to beat a dead horse, this new architecture
supposedly will make writing drivers dramatically easier, too, so that
the issues about background printing on Imagewriters would be much
easier to fix.

take all this with as much blood-pressure medicine as you need to say
healthy.

bc
could think of worse things about Macs

			        About USENET

USENET (Users’ Network) was a bulletin board shared among many computer
systems around the world. USENET was a logical network, sitting on top
of several physical networks, among them UUCP, BLICN, BERKNET, X.25, and
the ARPANET. Sites on USENET included many universities, private companies
and research organizations. See USENET Archives.

		       SCO Files Lawsuit Against IBM

March 7, 2003 - The SCO Group filed legal action against IBM in the State 
Court of Utah for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, 
unfair competition and breach of contract. The complaint alleges that IBM 
made concentrated efforts to improperly destroy the economic value of 
UNIX, particularly UNIX on Intel, to benefit IBM's Linux services 
business. See SCO vs IBM.

The materials and information included in this website may only be used
for purposes such as criticism, review, private study, scholarship, or
research.

Electronic mail:			       WorldWideWeb:
   tech-insider@outlook.com			  http://tech-insider.org/