From: freaspeach@mail.com
In article <4w%ab.1554$7W4.1340@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>, "DeepThought"
wrote:
Okay, the headache I had all day is finally gone, so I feel up to responding
to this. For the sake of repitition, I'll try to steer clear of any topics
I've touched on in the "Re: Mac Lover" thread, so this shouldn't take too
long :)
> I have seen you nitpick on this CONSTANTLY. Seriously, get a grip! We use
> PCs to mean Windows machines, and Macs to mean Macs. Live with it.
Sorry, but that's one of my pet peeves, like calling pop soda, or calling a
root beer a Coke. Things have names, and they have them for a reason. A PC
is a personal computer, not just a Windows machine. Do you call a RedHat
box a Linux PC? How many times have you heard a machine with a little red
demon inside called a BSD PC? Call it my moment of zealotry. I'm pretty
tolerant of most things Mac vs. Win-wise, but PC does not mean Windows :)
> All third party Windows units I have used have worked for me right every
> time. The only reason you claim the limited selection of Mac hardware does
> the same is that they have NO ROOM FOR INSPIRATION. They are controlled by
> the harsh guidelines and limits that programming for a mac brings.
They're harsh to ensure that things work the way they're supposed to, every
time. Even silly stuff like menu options, like how on EVERY SINGLE app
(those designed to follow Apple's human interface standards, at least)
command-s is ALWAYS save, command-c is ALWAYS copy... I can remember a time
when I had four different apps running on a Windows machine, and every one
of them used a different keyboard shortcut for the same command. Drove me
nuts. Ease of design and following standards is the way to go.
> > Yep, the closed architecture was a pain, but justified under the
> > "whole widget" concept. Jobs and Woz figured people didn't *need* to
> > monkey with the guts of the machine, they just needed to use it.
>
> Well, they were wrong. I mean, I understand, I wouldn't trust a Mac user to
> touch *my* computer *either*, but...
Good thing all the Windows users I assisted working at my old university
didn't have that attitude, there would have been a lot of machines still
broken :)
> 1) Sounds like Mac floppy hype... reading the mac.com site again?
??? mac.com is the main page for Apple's ".Mac" program; not sure what that
has to do with the antiquated technology of floppies.
> 2) If you had a PC, you wouldn't need to remove the floppy... they have nice
> multiple HD ports built right in.
I needed to remove the floppy so I could install a third hard drive. I tell
ya, in the last year, I've needed to use a floppy drive all of once, and
that was to get a zip file from someone who's computer didn't have Internet
access. If I need to move files around between computers at home, I either
shuttle them around on the LAN, or upload them to an ftp site and then
download them with the other machine. That's still faster and more reliable
than a floppy :)
> But do you actually get the expanded MENU INTERFACE that you get with a PC,
> allowing you to do a variety of options to that file with two clicks?
Touched on this in the other thread.
> > By the way, that mouse was NOT attached to the keyboard.
> > As far as I know (and I've been using Macs since the Plus) Apple has
> > never sold a mouse that was hardwired to the keyboard. True, that
> > might be the only place you could plug it in, but it was never stuck
> > there.
>
> HAH!
>
> "Oh, sure, that was the only place to plug it in, but you were never
> RESTRICTED to have it there, were you?"
And how many places are there to plug in a serial mouse on *your* computer?
:) And think about this - on some older Macs, there were actually *two* ADB
ports on the machine where you could plug in your mouse... and if you didn't
like that, you could plug them into a spare port on your keyboard if you had
one! Like on my machine - I have one port on my machine; my keyboard is
plugged into it, and my keyboard has two extra ports on it. My 3-button
Trackmarble is plugged into one, and my Wacom tablet is plugged into the
other.
Then there's the fact that Apple used to ship software with the OS called
"Mouse Keys", which allowed you to use your number pad as a mouse, so you
didn't really need to have one installed.
> I'm sorry, some of like advanced computers that can actually *so* things.
Again, see the other thread.
> So you're saying Apple progress is making things more undesirable?
That's what progress is all about. Some people don't like change. I'm one
of them. I don't like how OS9 / OS X looks. Some people love it. I think
it's farily hideous; bad on the eyes, violates tons of their old UI
guidelines, including the ones that made Macs friendly for the color
blind... but it still looks better than that dried paint blob interface for
XP >^p
And how the hell do you just get to the hard drive in XP? I tried to find it
on my sister's machine, and gave up out of frustration. Of course, she may
have had it in some kid-safe mode so they couldn't access the whole machine,
I don't know.
> You *do* know that although there are many programs WRITTEN for it doesn't
> mean you have to INSTALL every one, don't you?
See the latest batch of mail viruses written specifically for Windows where
you don't even need to look at the attached payload for it to install itself
on your system.
> > I can tell him is "get a Mac, and you won't have to worry about that
> > crap".
>
> "You'll only have to worry about more, DIFFERENT crap!
Yep, more secure, user friendly, not gonna eat your machine whole if you
look at a file funny crap :)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
