What we need from Mac OS X
Rick Gray
NeXT turbo color at home that connects to the lab via PPP through a
local ISP. We have several old black NeXTs and Intel machines, all
running Nextstep 3.3, at the lab. I'm tired of the main discussions
here being about game speed, $400 differences in price between Apple
and Microsoft-running Intel machines, and which processors are
marginally faster. I need comparisons and info for the real work I do
every day. For example, here's what I've been doing this weekend at
home:
1) Used emacs and Omniweb to fix a few bugs in a Perl5 application
that maintains a WWW-based scheduling calendar for our departmental
seminar series.
2) Worked on data analysis. Used a lab-written program to take image
data from a Photometrics frame transfer CCD camera and write out 104
individual ppm files of each frame during a run. These pseudo-color
data reflect changes in intracelluar calcium with time. Then used
programs from the netpbm package to merge each of those frames with an
image of the cell under study and masked the calcium image to the
shape of the cell. Used a csh 'foreach' loop to do all of them.
Another foreach loop rotated all the combined images 90'. Then used
the "makempeg" shell script to combine the 104 images into a MPEG
movie. That script used many of the netpbm programs and the 'mpeg'
program. The end result is a movie of a neuron with the color
changing with time in different parts of the cell during stimulation.
(MPEG-making info from http://www.arc.umn.edu/GVL/Software/mpeg.html).
Viewed the movie with both Movie.app and MPEG_Play.app. Programs used
for all this: netpbm programs (downloaded and compiled with cc),
Project Builder, several shell scripts, OmniWeb searching to find some
of the programs I needed to get off the net, emacs for all editing,
PixelMagician.app to view intermediate ppm images.
3) Continued on data analysis working with XY plots of the data.
Modified a locally-written f77 program (Absoft compiler) to take each
trace and subtract a background trace. Used 'dm' and 'gas' from
UNIX|stat and GNU tools to scale data. Plotted data with nxyplot,
collected several plots as EPS files and added annotation with
SuperDraw.app.
4) We use LaTeX for manuscript preparation. We also use TiB to
maintain a lab database of bibliographic references and format the
citations and bibliographies. This weekend I investigated using
PubMed as a tool to gather lists of new articles every week. To do
this I wrote an HTML front end to send requests directly to the
National Library of Medicine to get current tables of content for a
list of about 100 scientific journals we follow. Articles desired are
then marked, and a list of articles (in Medline format) are
downloaded. This list is then massaged with Perl to convert it into
refer format for inclusion in our bibliographic database.
5) Rlogin'd to different machines at work to fix a few mail
configuration files and update aliases for people who have moved.
So, in one weekend I used
a) emacs for all editing
b) OmniWeb to find and download program source code off the net and
test locally-generated HTML code
c) The plain C compiler and objective C compiler to build programs
d) lots of command-line and csh-script programs (using pipes
and redirection)
e) Perl for text manipulation and generating HTML code on-the-run
f) a f77 compiler for some numerical analysis (I think fastest in
fortran for numerical stuff; shows my age, eh?)
g) the netpbm programs (built from C source; some programs tweaked for
our special uses)
h) make and makefiles
i) nxyplot for data visualization and saving plots in EPS
j) SuperDraw to combine EPS files on one page
k) command-line FTP to move files between home and lab.
l) GateKeeper to handle PPP connections.
m) NextMail to send files containing images to co-workers for
feedback.
n) Unix networking to log into different machines to update
configurations.
Other things we need in the lab
a) We use SafetyNet to back up our files every night from all the
local machines with NFS-mounted directories
b) We need to have a good driver kit to write drivers for data
acquisition hardware (a/d, d/a converters; CCD cameras)
c) lots of networking; data may be crunched an another machine, then
displayed on a NeXT. We use NXHost to run some old black-only apps
and display on Intel machines.
Nextstep makes all of the above easy. We also have a new SGI in the
lab; it's fast as hell for straight number crunching, but just not as
easy to use for things like the above. X looks bad compared to the
Next window manager and display. Next services and universal cut&paste
make things so easy. I guess I use about 75% general Unix
command-line tools and 25% point&click apps; the proportions are
opposite for most in the lab and closer to 98% point&click for the
rest. Nextstep makes up all happy, regardless of our usage styles.
If MacOS X will let us do all of the above, we'll likely go with
Apples to replace our aging NeXTstep-running machines. If not it'll
be really hard to decide between NT, Linux, SGI, or a bullet in the
head.
--
Rick Gray, Ph.D., Div. Neuroscience, Baylor Col. Med., Houston, Tx 77030
ri...@mft.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu | http://mft.neusc.bcm.tmc.edu/cnl
Steven Schulze
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Brian Lewis
Intel newsgroups! That and no moderation! Gotta love usenet.
Gierke
(Rick Gray) wrote:
Off of the top of my head, I'd suggest that you look at MacOS X Server
(a.k.a Rhapsody) rather than MacOS X. It's more driven towards those kinds
of operations.
--
Å‚I pledge to punch all switches, to never shoot where I could use
grenades, to admit the existence of no level except Total Carnage, to
never use Caps Lock as my ÅšrunÄ… key, and to never, ever, leave a
single Bob alive.Ë› -- Oath of the Vidmaster
Steven Schulze
Gierke wrote in message ...
Now there's another oxymoron:
Mac Server
And with Apple's track record on delivering on OS promises, I believe it's
going to stay that way for a long time....
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
Brian Lewis
releases.
7.6 - On Time
8.0 - On Time
8.1 - On Time
8.5 - Should be no exception
MS Still hasn't got SP4 for NT 4.0 out after promising and promising
it would be available in March, the May, then July, then a month after
NT5 Beta 2.
On Sun, 30 Aug 1998 16:18:00 -0700, "Steven Schulze"
<ssch...@netwiz.net> wrote:
>
>Gierke wrote in message ...
Jacob F
is great, it has a CLI shell (I dont really use it since I dont know
what Im doing with it :-P). Linux is great for Networking so is
FreeBSD, but a lot of your stuff seems to be based on NeXt software
right? Wouldnt it be tough to port it all? Since MacOS X is Next based
it would probably be your BEST solution.
- Jacob Fuller
- My HomePage
- Home of the Quake BenchMark Project
- http://jf.simplenet.com
- Quality Web Hosting
- http://www.virtualisys.com/vr/dfuller/
spam...@ruin.the.internet.channelu.com
> I'm concerned whether the "new" Apple will meet our needs. I have a
> NeXT turbo color at home that connects to the lab via PPP through a
> local ISP. We have several old black NeXTs and Intel machines, all
> running Nextstep 3.3, at the lab. I'm tired of the main discussions
> here being about game speed, $400 differences in price between Apple
> and Microsoft-running Intel machines, and which processors are
> marginally faster. I need comparisons and info for the real work I do
> every day. For example, here's what I've been doing this weekend at
> home:
>
> 1) Used emacs and Omniweb to fix a few bugs in a Perl5 application
> that maintains a WWW-based scheduling calendar for our departmental
> seminar series.
In MacOS X Server you should still have emacs, and most certianly
OmniWeb - with some improvments.
> 2) Worked on data analysis. Used a lab-written program to take image
> data from a Photometrics frame transfer CCD camera and write out 104
> individual ppm files of each frame during a run. These pseudo-color
> data reflect changes in intracelluar calcium with time. Then used
> programs from the netpbm package to merge each of those frames with
an
> image of the cell under study and masked the calcium image to the
> shape of the cell. Used a csh 'foreach' loop to do all of them.
> Another foreach loop rotated all the combined images 90'. Then used
> the "makempeg" shell script to combine the 104 images into a MPEG
> movie. That script used many of the netpbm programs and the 'mpeg'
> program. The end result is a movie of a neuron with the color
> changing with time in different parts of the cell during stimulation.
> (MPEG-making info from
http://www.arc.umn.edu/GVL/Software/mpeg.html).
> Viewed the movie with both Movie.app and MPEG_Play.app. Programs
used
> for all this: netpbm programs (downloaded and compiled with cc),
> Project Builder, several shell scripts, OmniWeb searching to find
some
> of the programs I needed to get off the net, emacs for all editing,
> PixelMagician.app to view intermediate ppm images.
We should know more when CR1 arrives, but a couple of notes.
First netpbm should be portable to CR1. Integer code on the G3
should really fly. Also if you want to run any apps from 3.3 or 4.2
your going to need x86 versions of your apps. If there arn't any
your stuck in 68040 land. Not sure if PixelMagician is bi-FAT
probably is.
> 3) Continued on data analysis working with XY plots of the data.
> Modified a locally-written f77 program (Absoft compiler) to take each
> trace and subtract a background trace. Used 'dm' and 'gas' from
> UNIX|stat and GNU tools to scale data. Plotted data with nxyplot,
> collected several plots as EPS files and added annotation with
> SuperDraw.app.
g77 should be portable though it may cause problems with cc
from CR1. Hopefully this will get ironed out quickly. floating
point code should be as fast on x86 as G3.
> 4) We use LaTeX for manuscript preparation. We also use TiB to
> maintain a lab database of bibliographic references and format the
> citations and bibliographies. This weekend I investigated using
> PubMed as a tool to gather lists of new articles every week. To do
> this I wrote an HTML front end to send requests directly to the
> National Library of Medicine to get current tables of content for a
> list of about 100 scientific journals we follow. Articles desired
are
> then marked, and a list of articles (in Medline format) are
> downloaded. This list is then massaged with Perl to convert it into
> refer format for inclusion in our bibliographic database.
Not sure what will happen to the LaTex applications. I don't use
it so I don't know if they are Bi-Fat or not, or if source is
avialable.
Thing is unless source is available and you want to port it you'll
be stuck with a G3, with a x86 running CR1 there might be some
hope if the apps are bi-fat.
> 5) Rlogin'd to different machines at work to fix a few mail
> configuration files and update aliases for people who have moved.
Shell stuff should always be there - even if not in the base install.
I would say that Apple G3's won't be able to cover everything you'll
want to be doing, certianly not with the same applications unless some
ports happen. More likely you'll get replacements that won't be
compatible
with the old versions. The best way to deal with moving up would be
to
get a x86 PC and run CR1 on it. Then hope that indeed old NeXTstep
or Openstep apps will run on CR1 (this won't happen w/o some minor
non-standard hacking).
Start with a PC running CR1 then see what happens. You really can't
lose. BTW SGI is going the way of NT. Linux is a whole different ball
of wax but it still runs on x86 also so getting x86 still leaves your
choices
open. SGI's are getting really cheap IMO. Check out the Indigo2's
if your looking for a bargain.
Randy
--
Randy
rencsok at
channelu dot com
argus dot cem dot msu dot edu
spammers works also :)
Randy Rencsok General UNIX, NeXTStep, IRIX Admining,
Turbo Software Consulting, Programming, etc.)
Paul Buckley
>... For example, here's what I've been doing this weekend...
I hope you're taking Monday off.
My work now is mostly clinical (using spreadsheet and filing apps) but back
in the lab I had a similar environment. Before the NeXT cube appeared
dedicated PCs collected the data, SGI machines were used for crunching
operations using the cli, and images had to be ported to the mac for some
manipulations, not a simple task. The black box quickly became a central
place for publication preparation since it had the apps and the engine and
could communicate with all the the other machines. The availability of true
WISIWIG, and the lack of a versatile filesystem, left the mac idle. Now that
the NeXTs are ageing I understand the lab is moving back to the old
suffle-between-boxes paradigm (and they have a few new macs around anyway).
Unfortunately, Apple is not marketing its new tools to edu, nor to people
who spend their weekends exploiting their specialized system. X is still a
sophisticated OS so if they just stop working so hard to hobble it and to
hide it from their users your kind of interconnectivity, somebody's
preference for vertical menus, and multiple filesystem types will all be
possible. Otherwise, it's probably time to hire someone who knows Linux (and
buy a couple of old station power supplies).
Dan
>Since Amelio took charge, they've been on target for their OS
>releases.
>
>7.6 - On Time
>8.0 - On Time
>8.1 - On Time
>8.5 - Should be no exception
>
>MS Still hasn't got SP4 for NT 4.0 out after promising and promising
>it would be available in March, the May, then July, then a month after
>NT5 Beta 2.
The difference here is:
1.) Apple releases it's products on time by not finishing it's feature sets.
Example, Copland hit the shelves on time, but did not have PMT or MP as
Apple promised it would.
2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
"finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
I prefer #2. I'll wait for the finished product (which includes all the
promised feature sets).
MS also knows, the longer they test a product, the better quality it will be
when it's released. SP3 for NT 4.0 is good example of this... while SP1 and
SP2 fixed many bugs, they also added some. It took MS much longer to release
SP3 (which was delayed over and over again), and it resulted in a service
pack that not only fixed more bugs then any other service pack, but it also
did not "add" any bugs.
Dan
Proton
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> Brian Lewis wrote in message <35e9f6f2...@nntp.erinet.com>...
> >Since Amelio took charge, they've been on target for their OS
> >releases.
> >
> >7.6 - On Time
> >8.0 - On Time
> >8.1 - On Time
> >8.5 - Should be no exception
> >
> >MS Still hasn't got SP4 for NT 4.0 out after promising and promising
> >it would be available in March, the May, then July, then a month after
> >NT5 Beta 2.
>
>
> The difference here is:
>
> 1.) Apple releases it's products on time by not finishing it's feature sets.
> Example, Copland hit the shelves on time, but did not have PMT or MP as
> Apple promised it would.
I don't remember Copland hitting the shelves. Please explain.
> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
>
> I prefer #2. I'll wait for the finished product (which includes all the
> promised feature sets).
>
> MS also knows, the longer they test a product, the better quality it will be
> when it's released. SP3 for NT 4.0 is good example of this... while SP1 and
> SP2 fixed many bugs, they also added some. It took MS much longer to release
> SP3 (which was delayed over and over again), and it resulted in a service
> pack that not only fixed more bugs then any other service pack, but it also
> did not "add" any bugs.
>
> Dan
--
"You think it's a conspiracy by the networks to put bad shows on TV. But the shows are bad because that's what people want. It's not like Windows users don't have any power; I think they are happy with Windows, and that's an incredibly depressing thought..."
-- Steve Jobs
Dan
<*-31089820...@dub-ppp-051.tpgi.com.au>...
>I don't remember Copland hitting the shelves. Please explain.
That was the code name. Apple changed plans... they released their product
on time, but without PMT or MP.
spag...@my-dejanews.com
certain things he needs to do would be available under MacOS X. I know this
is an advocacy group, but could someone at least attempt an answer before we
descend into mindless MS vs Apple drivel?
Unfortunately, I don't have access to Rhapsody/MacOS X betas under any form,
so I can't essay an answer myself. As a likely customer, though, I'd be
grateful for some thoughtful answers from anyone who can do so without
violating NDAs.
Stefano Pagiola
---
My opinions alone
Longtime MacOS and NeXTSTEP user, reluctant Windows 95/NT user, future
Rhapsody user
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
gupta@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror_after_@
>> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
>> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
Utter BS. Show us one, just one, OS release Microsoft has done after 1994,
that was feature-complete (i.e., it had all the features talked about in
the myriads of Microsoft press releases before the actual release).
-arun gupta
Andrew McCormick
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
Copland was neither on time, nor ever released. Mac OS 8 was released on
time, with the feature set designated for it.
Andrew McCormick
root
Hey Andrew, is Kenny McCormick your cousin in SouthPark?
Steve Hix
> Proton <*@*.*> wrote in message
> <*-31089820...@dub-ppp-051.tpgi.com.au>...
>
> >I don't remember Copland hitting the shelves. Please explain.
>
> That was the code name. Apple changed plans... they released their product
> on time, but without PMT or MP.
Not Copland, they didn't.
Bits of what was to have been in Copland got rolled into MacOS 8.x,
though.
Joe Ragosta
gu...@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror after @ wrote:
Or show us one that was within even a year of its original target date.
Heck, make that two years.
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
See the Complete Macintosh Page at:
http://www.taylor-design.com/cMacindex.html
Lawson English
>Copland was neither on time, nor ever released. Mac OS 8 was released on
>time, with the feature set designated for it.
>
>Andrew McCormick
Actually, MacOS 8 was originally System 7.6 and it wasn't even scheduled to
be released or even had a firm feature set until they got around to
deciding what to do with System 7.x after the NeXT purchase.
And even the [non-Copland] MacOS 8 that you are talking about was lacking a
few features scheduled for the MacOS 8 that you are talking about. Those
were released in the free upgrade, MacOS 8.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want Apple to license Cyberdog for third-party development? Go to:
<http://www.pcsincnet.com/petition.html>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
blewis
<eng...@primenet.com> wrote:
> >Copland was neither on time, nor ever released. Mac OS 8 was released on
> >time, with the feature set designated for it.
> >
> >Andrew McCormick
>
>
>
> Actually, MacOS 8 was originally System 7.6 and it wasn't even scheduled to
> be released or even had a firm feature set until they got around to
> deciding what to do with System 7.x after the NeXT purchase.
>
Actually, MacOS 8 was originally System 7.7. 7.6 - Harmony was released
about eight months earlier. Tempo - 7.7 then 8.0.
Lawson English
[snipt]
>
>Actually, MacOS 8 was originally System 7.7. 7.6 - Harmony was released
>about eight months earlier. Tempo - 7.7 then 8.0.
That's right. Thanks.
OW...@hotmail.com
It is slow, buggy and nearly always a disapointment.
They don't release on time, so they can keep vapour-waring the competition.
OS/2 and NT?
Ring any bells?
In article <6sedab$8...@newsb.netnews.att.com>,
gu...@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror after @ wrote:
>
> >> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
> >> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
>
> Utter BS. Show us one, just one, OS release Microsoft has done after 1994,
> that was feature-complete (i.e., it had all the features talked about in
> the myriads of Microsoft press releases before the actual release).
>
> -arun gupta
Scott D. Feldstein
> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
ROTFL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--
Scott D. Feldstein
sdf-ams*SPAMSUCKS*execpc.com
www.execpc.com/~sdf-ams
Mike Zulauf
(Brian Lewis) wrote:
> Since Amelio took charge, they've been on target for their OS
> releases.
You're forgetting a couple of exceptions. Copland (never to be released)
and Rhapsody (first release date of 1/98).
Mike
--
Mike Zulauf
mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu
Steve Hix
> The difference here is:
>
> 1.) Apple releases it's products on time by not finishing it's feature sets.
> Example, Copland hit the shelves on time, but did not have PMT or MP as
> Apple promised it would.
Copland *never* shipped. Ever. Nor will it in the future.
At *most*, some features designed for Copland were rolled into
some recent releases of MacOS 8.x, which despite the numbering
are in no way "Copland".
> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
Right. Sure thing.
I've been a beta tester. I've been an MS customer.
The two conditions have *striking* similarities.
WillAdams
>2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
>"finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
Oh?
In that case--where's my Pen support in Win95? Gestures?
Oh, I see, it got left out.
William
William Adams
http://members.aol.com/willadams
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Steven Schulze
Joe Ragosta wrote in message ...
>insists on
>> >> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
>>
1994,
>> that was feature-complete (i.e., it had all the features talked about in
>> the myriads of Microsoft press releases before the actual release).
>
>Heck, make that two years.
At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
blewis
<ssch...@netwiz.net> wrote:
Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
unusable until the first service pack.
marm...@hei.unige.ch
> 2.) MS does not allways release it's products on time, because MS insists on
> "finishing" it's products before they hit the shelves.
>
Raph
marm...@hei.unige.ch
> In article <6scmmf$8dh$1...@supernews.com>, "Steven Schulze"
> <ssch...@netwiz.net> wrote:
>> Now there's another oxymoron:
>>
>> Mac Server
>
> Well, considering it's based on OPENSTEP and BSD, how hard do you think
> that'll be? This isn't the old Mac being used as a server.
>
> Rob.
You're right Rob! But this remain a funny oximoron... Mac...server, haha!
So it is time to break the malediction, and MACOSX is the OS for that purpose.
regards
Raph
Dan
>> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
>
>Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
>unusable until the first service pack.
Personal opinion...
I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
single Win95 bug... can you?
Dan
Todd Arneson
Dan wrote in message ...
Nope, but I can name 10 MacOS bugs right off the top of my head.
------------------------------
Todd
s124@earthlink.n*et
http://home.earthlink.net/~s124/
--
AOL IM: AAPLisDUMB; eatAPPLnow; iMac Hater.
--
ICQ: 14470496
--
Flames will be cheerfully returned to
sender----3,000,000 times.
-------------------------------
K. Sebring
<s1...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Dan wrote in message ...
>>blewis wrote in message ...
>>
>>>> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
>>>
>>>Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
>>>unusable until the first service pack.
>>
>>Personal opinion...
>>
>>
>>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>>single Win95 bug... can you?
>
>
>Nope, but I can name 10 MacOS bugs right off the top of my head.
Ok... we'll take your word for it, alright? You're a trusting guy.
--
-----------------------
k...@norfolk-county.com
kmsmac on AIM
ICQ #9251405
gupta@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror_after_@
>Personal opinion...
>
>
>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>single Win95 bug... can you?
Well, read the release notes.
Also, Windows 95 requires at least service pack 1 to be year 2000 compliant.
-arun gupta
Simon Barker
>blewis wrote in message ...
>
>>> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
>>
>>Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
>>unusable until the first service pack.
>
>Personal opinion...
>
>
>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>single Win95 bug... can you?
Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots of
bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at hotfixes
and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but there
still are bound to be many out there not fixed. The claim Win95 was unusable
until the first service pack is a bit silly but it's not entirely wrong either.
Christian Bau
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> blewis wrote in message ...
>
> >> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
> >
> >Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
> >unusable until the first service pack.
>
> Personal opinion...
>
>
> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
> single Win95 bug... can you?
What about this one (I know hundreds of Windows users will now come and
explain that it is no bug): Windows user asks me for help. His "START"
menu is gone. He can still click with the right mouse button pressed and
get a start menu, but he cant find it where it is supposed to be and is
pretty annoyed. Cant figure out how to get it running. There is, however,
a very thin greyish line at the right side of the screen...
So what happened: A not very experienced computer user got himself into a
situation where he couldnt use his computer properly anymore (as I figured
out later, by clicking into the start menu bar at the wrong point and
moving the mouse to the wrong point). I call this a bug.
Dan
>>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>>single Win95 bug... can you?
>
>Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots
of
>bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at
hotfixes
>and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but
there
>still are bound to be many out there not fixed.
I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user know
about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
care of.
>The claim Win95 was unusable
>until the first service pack is a bit silly but it's not entirely wrong
either.
I stand by what I said. If a user goes looking for documentation, containing
a list of known bugs, then obviously they will know of some that exist...
even if they don't experience them.
My point was that most users can't give you a example of a single bug in
Win95... but most users will agree that Win95 has plenty of them. It's
called "ignorance"... "hype"... etc.
Dan
Marcel Weiher
>I stand by what I said. If a user goes looking for documentation, containing
>a list of known bugs, then obviously they will know of some that exist...
>even if they don't experience them.
>My point was that most users can't give you a example of a single bug in
>Win95... but most users will agree that Win95 has plenty of them. It's
>called "ignorance"... "hype"... etc.
Hmm, this would probably because there is very little difference in Win 95
between normal operation and what most people would call a bug. As a
matter of fact, I personally find Win in normal use about as frustrating
as I find bugs in other software. YMMV.
Marcel
--
Java and C++ make you think that the new ideas are like the old ones.
Java is the most distressing thing to hit computing since MS-DOS.
- Alan Kay -
Steven Schulze
Christian Bau wrote in message ...
>In article <ZX8H1.831$3i2.5...@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Dan"
><d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
>
>> blewis wrote in message ...
>>
>> >> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
>> >
>> >Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
>>
>> Personal opinion...
>>
>>
>> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>> single Win95 bug... can you?
>
>explain that it is no bug): Windows user asks me for help. His "START"
>menu is gone. He can still click with the right mouse button pressed and
>get a start menu, but he cant find it where it is supposed to be and is
>pretty annoyed. Cant figure out how to get it running. There is, however,
>a very thin greyish line at the right side of the screen...
>
>So what happened: A not very experienced computer user got himself into a
>situation where he couldnt use his computer properly anymore (as I figured
>out later, by clicking into the start menu bar at the wrong point and
>moving the mouse to the wrong point). I call this a bug.
Here's the first Windows user telling you it's not a bug...
It's not a bug.
The idea is you can move the taskbar to any of the four sides by dragging it
wherever it suits you best.
How is this a bug?
Steven Schulze
Concord, CA
gupta@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror_after_@
>>> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>>> single Win95 bug... can you?
Here are some of the fixes with service pack 1 (taken from
PC Magazine, July 1996 v15 n13 p273)
"The OLE32 update fixes a problem that could cause some embarrasment --
or worse -- when you share files created with Wnidows 95 versions of
Microsoft Word, Excel or Powerpoint.....information you thought you
had deleted might still be visible when your file is viewed with another
editor..."
"The shell update, which replaces Shell32.dll,...corrects a problem
that causes files copied onto themselves to be truncated to 0 bytes
under certain conditions."
"The password list update corrects a weakness in the password file
encryption scheme that was exposed when someone posted a decryption
algorithm on the internet..." [the passwords are for network drives, etc.]
"The System Agent update .... replaces Sage.dll. When System Agent 1.0
is running, programs that perform floating-point calculations may be
slightly off in precision. The update corrects this problem."
"The network updates include a variety of fixes, mostly involving security,
that affects users of specific networks."
*****
In addition, as I mentioned before, service pack 1 is required in order
to be Y2K-compliant.
-arun gupta
Simon Barker
>Simon Barker wrote in message <35edc...@newsread1.dircon.co.uk>...
>
>>>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>>>single Win95 bug... can you?
>>
>>Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots
>of
>>bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at
>hotfixes
>>and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but
>there
>>still are bound to be many out there not fixed.
>
>I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user know
>about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
>fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
>care of.
I was refering to Win95, I used hotfix to save me the trouble of naming some
specific updates/bug fixes under Windows as essentially they are the same
thing.
>>The claim Win95 was unusable
>>until the first service pack is a bit silly but it's not entirely wrong
>either.
>
>I stand by what I said. If a user goes looking for documentation, containing
>a list of known bugs, then obviously they will know of some that exist...
>even if they don't experience them.
>My point was that most users can't give you a example of a single bug in
>Win95... but most users will agree that Win95 has plenty of them. It's
>called "ignorance"... "hype"... etc.
Perhaps, perhaps not.
Richard Frith-Macdonald
>Simon Barker wrote in message <35edc...@newsread1.dircon.co.uk>...
>>until the first service pack is a bit silly but it's not entirely wrong
>either.
>
>I stand by what I said. If a user goes looking for documentation, containing
>a list of known bugs, then obviously they will know of some that exist...
>even if they don't experience them.
>My point was that most users can't give you a example of a single bug in
>Win95... but most users will agree that Win95 has plenty of them. It's
>called "ignorance"... "hype"... etc.
Of course most users can't give an example of a specific bug -
they don't know how to isolate one - but they will be able to tell you that
their system has crashed/hung and that their applications have acted in
strange and unpredictable ways.
Just because some behaviour is not readily reproducable, doesn't make it any
less of a bug.
Joe Ragosta
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
>Simon Barker wrote in message <35edc...@newsread1.dircon.co.uk>...
>
>>>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
>>>single Win95 bug... can you?
>>
>>Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots
>of
>>bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at
>hotfixes
>>and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but
>there
>>still are bound to be many out there not fixed.
>
>I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user know
>about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
>fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
>care of.
>
Is _THAT_ what the hot fixes are for?
I thought that MS had to release them every 6 months or so because the
users were getting too good at working around existing bugs and they had
to find a way to introduce new ones.
Simon Barker
And let's throw in some more useless comments, anyone?
Dan
>>I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user
know
>>about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
>>fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
>>care of.
>
>I was refering to Win95, I used hotfix to save me the trouble of naming
some
>specific updates/bug fixes under Windows as essentially they are the same
>thing.
I was unaware that Win95 ever had a "hotfix"... are you sure you don't mean
"service pack"?
Dan
Dan
<35ee4...@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net>...
>Of course most users can't give an example of a specific bug -
>they don't know how to isolate one - but they will be able to tell you that
>their system has crashed/hung and that their applications have acted in
>strange and unpredictable ways.
>Just because some behaviour is not readily reproducable, doesn't make it
any
>less of a bug.
Their is a world of difference between software bugs, and OS bugs. MS does
not pretend to tell you that it Win9x supports memory protection (for
example)... so if you computer crashes due to a stack overflow in Netscape,
this is not a Win95 bug.
Dan
Dan
<6smevl$m...@newsb.netnews.att.com>...
>Some Microsoft shill wrote :
>
>>>> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>>> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name
a
>>>> single Win95 bug... can you?
>
>PC Magazine, July 1996 v15 n13 p273)
I was talking about bugs the user has experienced. It's not important if
it's not effecting you personally.
Dan
Gareth Paxton
>So what happened: A not very experienced computer user got himself into a
>situation where he couldnt use his computer properly anymore (as I figured
>out later, by clicking into the start menu bar at the wrong point and
>moving the mouse to the wrong point). I call this a bug.
Its called flexibility and gives you the freedom to customise the way your
desktop looks.
Gareth,
PS Stop playing dumb.......
gupta@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror_after_@
>>
>>Here are some of the fixes with service pack 1 (taken from
>>PC Magazine, July 1996 v15 n13 p273)
>
>I was talking about bugs the user has experienced. It's not important if
>it's not effecting you personally.
Well, personally, I use Windows 95 only because I work for a particular
corporation. I had to install Service Pack 1 on Windows 95 because
it is policy to be year 2000 compliant by the end of this year.
Regarding the other bugs, the OLE32 bug hit the Macintosh too, in Office 98,
and was quickly experienced by many Macintosh users. Don't tell me it
didn't hit Windows users.
As to floating point errors, I guess, after running on Pentiums,
Windows users don't particularly worry about them.
-arun gupta
Aaron Ciesar
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
>gu...@kcopsrm.tm.tta.moc-mirror after @ wrote in message
><6smevl$m...@newsb.netnews.att.com>...
>>Some Microsoft shill wrote :
>>
>>>>> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
>>>>> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name
>a
>>>>> single Win95 bug... can you?
>>
>>Here are some of the fixes with service pack 1 (taken from
>>PC Magazine, July 1996 v15 n13 p273)
>
>I was talking about bugs the user has experienced. It's not important if
>it's not effecting you personally.
>
>Dan
Here is a real simple Win95 bug to find. It is called <drum roll
please...> the year 2000 bug. It requires the download of this patch
"WIN95Y2K.EXE" to fix. The patch updates the WINFILE.EXE and
COMMAND.COM. Here is the URL for info and download.
info = <http://www.microsoft.com/technet/topics/year2k/product/Win95OEM.htm>
download patch = <ftp://ftp.microsoft.com/softlib/mslfiles/WIN95Y2K.EXE>
Enjoy.
--
Aaron Ciesar
Data Manager/Analyst
UPMC Stroke Institute
Simon Barker
fixes" not I actually used a hotfix Dan, I used the term hotfix to save me the
trouble of naming specific updates/fixes. If you call a building something else
it's still a building and the same applies to hotfixes and the various bug
fixes/updates etc provided for Win95.
Christian Bau
<gord...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
No Macintosh user ever claimed that using Windows brainwashes the user...
But I wouldnt claim it doesnt! The user I was talking about couldnt use
his computer properly for two weeks because of what you call flexibility
and freedom to customise. That is not a feature, that is a bug.
On the other hand, some people say that Windows has no bugs, but the
features alone are annoying enough :-)
MojiDoji
(Simon Barker) wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Sep 1998 08:27:35 -0400, Joe Ragosta says...
>
> >In article <qArH1.421$XE1.3...@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Dan"
> ><d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Simon Barker wrote in message <35edc...@newsread1.dircon.co.uk>...
> >>
> >>>>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
> >>>>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
> >>>>single Win95 bug... can you?
> >>>
> >>>Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots
> >>of
> >>>bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at
> >>hotfixes
> >>>and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but
> >>there
> >>>still are bound to be many out there not fixed.
> >>
> >>I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user know
> >>about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
> >>fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
> >>care of.
> >
> >Is _THAT_ what the hot fixes are for?
> >
> >I thought that MS had to release them every 6 months or so because the
> >users were getting too good at working around existing bugs and they had
> >to find a way to introduce new ones.
>
> And let's throw in some more useless comments, anyone?
I have a fishtank.
--
To reply, replace "no-spam" with "mottbi"
Simon Barker
>In article <6soefj$laf$1...@heliodor.xara.net>, "Gareth Paxton"
><gord...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> >So what happened: A not very experienced computer user got himself into a
>> >situation where he couldnt use his computer properly anymore (as I figured
>> >out later, by clicking into the start menu bar at the wrong point and
>> >moving the mouse to the wrong point). I call this a bug.
>>
>> Its called flexibility and gives you the freedom to customise the way your
>> desktop looks.
>No Macintosh user ever claimed that using Windows brainwashes the user...
>But I wouldnt claim it doesnt! The user I was talking about couldnt use
>his computer properly for two weeks because of what you call flexibility
>and freedom to customise. That is not a feature, that is a bug.
They couldn't use the computer because either they or someone they had let use
the machine had moved the start menu and that's to be considered a bug? If you
move an icon and you can't find it is that also a bug? If you move your car and
you can't find it again is that somehow a bug too? I'm sorry but put blunty no.
Dan
>Here is a real simple Win95 bug to find. It is called <drum roll
>please...> the year 2000 bug. It requires the download of this patch
>"WIN95Y2K.EXE" to fix. The patch updates the WINFILE.EXE and
>COMMAND.COM. Here is the URL for info and download.
If you don't use DOS applications (and who does anymore), you won't be
effected though.
Dan
hugh...@my-dejanews.com
1) Typing the first letter of an icon's name doesn't work properly.
2) Dunno if this counts as a bug, but there is no live scrolling
3) If you put a folder hierachy in the wastebasket, windoze forgets which
folder each item was in.
4) Windoze doesn't work properly, if at all, if it can see HPFS partitions.
5) To get it to work with LILO, you have to use DiskDruid to make the MKFS ,
swap partitions and dos partition, then install windows, then install linux
again.
6) Does the fact that windoze crashes twice a day on average not suggest to
you that there are a fair few bugs in the memory management?
7) If windoze is soooo bug free, why does every other piece of M$ software
replace the MSCVRT.DLL?
Covert bug fixes?
I don't hate microsoft for just being good at marketting.
I don't hate them for having a monopoly.
I hate them because their products are the worst crap ever to crawl the face
of the earth.
Owen Hughes
N. Wales
In article <qArH1.421$XE1.3...@newsfeed.slurp.net>,
"Dan" <d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> Simon Barker wrote in message <35edc...@newsread1.dircon.co.uk>...
>
> >>I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
> >>Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
> >>single Win95 bug... can you?
> >
> >Err yeah you do if you read the documents that were with it, there are lots
> of
> >bugs in Windows *many* people are aware of, all you need do is look at
> hotfixes
> >and sp's and program updates etc of course they're mostly fixed now but
> there
> >still are bound to be many out there not fixed.
>
> I was talking about Win95, not NT. MS is very good at letting the user know
> about the bugs that exist in NT by providing hotfixes... regardless of the
> fact that most users do not experience the bugs that these hotfixes take
> care of.
>
> >The claim Win95 was unusable
> >until the first service pack is a bit silly but it's not entirely wrong
> either.
>
> I stand by what I said. If a user goes looking for documentation, containing
> a list of known bugs, then obviously they will know of some that exist...
> even if they don't experience them.
> My point was that most users can't give you a example of a single bug in
> Win95... but most users will agree that Win95 has plenty of them. It's
> called "ignorance"... "hype"... etc.
>
> Dan
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
hugh...@my-dejanews.com
"If the computer does something dumb, why it must be MY fault".
A decent OS should work how you want it to.
If it doesn't, then you should be able to change it.
Owen Hughes
In article <6sm7m1$p16$1...@supernews.com>,
"Steven Schulze" <ssch...@netwiz.net> wrote:
>
> Christian Bau wrote in message ...
> >In article <ZX8H1.831$3i2.5...@newsfeed.slurp.net>, "Dan"
> ><d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> >
> >> blewis wrote in message ...
> >>
> >> >> At least they get released. Better late than never, a la Apple.
> >> >
> >> >Sure, they may get released, but they are buggy as hell and mostly
> >> >unusable until the first service pack.
> >>
> >> Personal opinion...
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't know anyone that knows what the difference is between Win95 and
> >> Win95 with service pack 1... nor can 95% of any Win95 user find or name a
> >> single Win95 bug... can you?
> >
> >What about this one (I know hundreds of Windows users will now come and
> >explain that it is no bug): Windows user asks me for help. His "START"
> >menu is gone. He can still click with the right mouse button pressed and
> >get a start menu, but he cant find it where it is supposed to be and is
> >pretty annoyed. Cant figure out how to get it running. There is, however,
> >a very thin greyish line at the right side of the screen...
> >
> >So what happened: A not very experienced computer user got himself into a
> >situation where he couldnt use his computer properly anymore (as I figured
> >out later, by clicking into the start menu bar at the wrong point and
> >moving the mouse to the wrong point). I call this a bug.
>
> Here's the first Windows user telling you it's not a bug...
>
> It's not a bug.
>
> The idea is you can move the taskbar to any of the four sides by dragging it
> wherever it suits you best.
>
> How is this a bug?
>
> Steven Schulze
> Concord, CA
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
MojiDoji
> hugh...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >Windoze user filth mentality:
> >
> >"If the computer does something dumb, why it must be MY fault".
>
> Yes, 9 times out of 10 that's the case.
>
> >
> >A decent OS should work how you want it to.
>
> What OS offers the user more customization options?
> Linux would have to be number one because the source code is
> distributed with the OS. Win9x/NT would be second. Both allow the user
> to freely configure almost every aspect of the OS. MacOS doesn't even
> make the list as far as I'm concerned. You either do it Apples way or
> you can FOAD.
>
> >If it doesn't, then you should be able to change it.
>
> Tell that to Apple.
>
I agree, Win95/NT is far more configurable than MacOS. But I think OS/2
should be placed between Linux and Windows.
Todd Arneson
hugh...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6src19$1p3$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Bugs:
>
>1) Typing the first letter of an icon's name doesn't work properly.
What? Explain.
>3) If you put a folder hierachy in the wastebasket, windoze forgets which
>folder each item was in.
This isn't a bug, that's how Win9x was made. By your reasoning, a car has a
bug because it can't fly. Come on...
>4) Windoze doesn't work properly, if at all, if it can see HPFS partitions.
I don't know what your talking about.....
>6) Does the fact that windoze crashes twice a day on average not suggest to
>you that there are a fair few bugs in the memory management?
HAHA! Your critizising Windows memory management????? Let me tell you, my
computer NEVER crashes... only once in a while when IE40 messes up.
>7) If windoze is soooo bug free, why does every other piece of M$ software
>replace the MSCVRT.DLL?
>Covert bug fixes?
There is no "mscvrt.dll" on my system.....
>I don't hate microsoft for just being good at marketting.
That isn't a bug...
>I don't hate them for having a monopoly.
That isn't a bug...
>I hate them because their products are the worst crap ever to crawl the
face
>of the earth.
And Apple is any better? That's funny.
------------------------------
Todd
s124@earthlink.n*et
http://home.earthlink.net/~s124/
--
AOL IM: AAPLisDUMB; eatAPPLnow; iMac Hater.
--
ICQ: 14470496
--
Flames will be cheerfully returned to
sender----3,000,000 times.
-------------------------------
Dan
<6srcdn$2dl$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>"If the computer does something dumb, why it must be MY fault".
This is the Linux users mentality.
Dan
Dan
>It would be nice if Gates would climb down off his
>mountain of gold and provide a scripting language standard with NT. If
>your gonna bloat up a Op system you may as well toss in some useful
>things.
You'd be suprised... much of the source code is avalible from Micorsoft to
MSDN members.
Dan
Dan
>Like how do I get more IRQ's?
If you use PCI it doesn't matter, because PCI cards can share IRQ's. Also,
all USB and Parallel devices use the same IRQ.
Basically, if you don't use ISA, IRQ problems don't exist.
Dan
Dan
<6src19$1p3$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Bugs:
>
>1) Typing the first letter of an icon's name doesn't work properly.
Explain...
>2) Dunno if this counts as a bug, but there is no live scrolling
What is Live Scolling?
>3) If you put a folder hierachy in the wastebasket, windoze forgets which
>folder each item was in.
Not true. If you drag a folder to the Recycle Bin, and restore that folder,
all contents go back to their original location. What are you talking about?
>4) Windoze doesn't work properly, if at all, if it can see HPFS partitions.
Windows, Win95, and Win98 can't read HPFS partitions. NT can.
BTW, features that don't exist, but you wish did, are not bugs.
>5) To get it to work with LILO, you have to use DiskDruid to make the MKFS
,
>swap partitions and dos partition, then install windows, then install linux
>again.
That's LILO's problem. LILO is a Linux boot loader... it's their
responsibility to configure their boot loader to work with other operating
systems, not MS's. Windows has been around much longer then LILO.
>6) Does the fact that windoze crashes twice a day on average not suggest to
>you that there are a fair few bugs in the memory management?
Windows crashes about as often as Mac OS does. Most crashes are the fault of
the loaded software, not the OS. NT has memory protection which eliminates
this problem. I've been running NT for over a year without a crash.
>7) If windoze is soooo bug free, why does every other piece of M$ software
>replace the MSCVRT.DLL?
>Covert bug fixes?
Bug fixes? No. Adding new code, not replacing it.
So far you still haven't given me one example of a bug.
Dan
Dan
>>3) If you put a folder hierachy in the wastebasket, windoze forgets which
>>folder each item was in.
>
>This isn't a bug, that's how Win9x was made. By your reasoning, a car has a
>bug because it can't fly. Come on...
Actually, Win95 and Win98 does remember the location of each file. It tells
you where they came from when you view the Recycle Bin's folder in detail
mode, or get properties on each file.. and when you restore them, they are
restored to their original location.
Dan
Todd Arneson
Wayne Fellows wrote in message ...
>On Sat, Sep 5, 1998 8:52 PM, MojiDoji <mailto:no-...@one.net> wrote:
>>I agree, Win95/NT is far more configurable than MacOS. But I think OS/2
>>should be placed between Linux and Windows.
>
>
>blows away any OS except, perhapse, the various flavors of Unix.
Oh really? Can you give any examples?
Wayne Fellows
Wayne Fellows
>You'd be suprised... much of the source code is avalible from Micorsoft to
>MSDN members.
>Dan
Except the parts ment to give MS an advantage in the applications arena...
K. Sebring
<s124@[REMOVE]earthlink.net> wrote:
>Wayne Fellows wrote in message ...
>Oh really? Can you give any examples?
Tell me one thing that you can customize in WIndows. I'll tell you I can
do it with the MacOS.
Not to mention:
Kaleidoscope. I can change *every little thing* about the appearance of
the OS. If you don't believe me, i'll send you a screenshot that is an
almost exact replica of Windows 95.
AppleScript. I can automate practically *anything* I want to. That's
customizability.
Various other 3rd party extensions and control panels. Go do a search for
Mac shareware. You'll find alot.
Just take a look at the included control panels with the MacOS. Unlike
Windows, which uses Control Panels for entering wads and wads of
configuration strings, you can actually do things with CDEV's.
There's also ALOT of things about the Finder that can be customized. If
you REALLY want to hear them, email me. I'll find time.
Hell, you want custom, straight out? I'll send you a screenshot of my desktop.
>
>------------------------------
>Todd
>s124@earthlink.n*et
>http://home.earthlink.net/~s124/
>--
>AOL IM: AAPLisDUMB; eatAPPLnow; iMac Hater.
>--
>ICQ: 14470496
>--
>Flames will be cheerfully returned to
>sender----3,000,000 times.
>-------------------------------
--
-----------------------
k...@norfolk-county.com
kmsmac on AIM
ICQ #9251405
Steve Sullivan
<d...@knowspaam.com> wrote:
> >3) If you put a folder hierachy in the wastebasket, windoze forgets which
> >folder each item was in.
>
> Not true. If you drag a folder to the Recycle Bin, and restore that folder,
> all contents go back to their original location. What are you talking about?
From my limited use of windows I know what he is talking about.
Mac: say I have 3 folders, each with about 100 items in the trash. "todo"
in folder 2, path 2/thingstodo/today was not meant to be thrown away. On
the mac, everything is in the same folders etc. On windows, their would
be 300 files you have to wade through to get to it
--
Just because you use a mac doesnt mean you have to lose all
semblance of reason and logic
Steve Sullivan
k...@norfolk-county.com (K. Sebring) wrote:
> Kaleidoscope. I can change *every little thing* about the appearance of
> the OS. If you don't believe me, i'll send you a screenshot that is an
> almost exact replica of Windows 95.
hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
K. Sebring
mac...@concentric.net (Steve Sullivan) wrote:
>In article <kms-060998...@dialinuser190.norfolk-county.com>,
>k...@norfolk-county.com (K. Sebring) wrote:
>
>> Kaleidoscope. I can change *every little thing* about the appearance of
>> the OS. If you don't believe me, i'll send you a screenshot that is an
>> almost exact replica of Windows 95.
>
>hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
>what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
>it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
Come on. You know exactly what Kaliedoscope can do. And you know it's alot.
What is it with you, anyways?
You act like a fourth grader who, maybe, "tries to be cool" by swaying
whatever way will get you the most attention. It seems that whenever
there is an argument, you'll take the side that appears to be "winning".
Why is that? If you deny this, i'll do some Deja searching and come up
with some examples. But please, don't make me waste my time.
Wayne Fellows
wrote:
>hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
>what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
>it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
Actually you can come close. You can designate the font, change the Apple
picture, and add colors and textures to the menus. You can also change the
shape of windowing elemends, so your desktop can look like pretty much
anything. There are schemes for BeOS, NeXT, the game Fallout, a rusty
boilerplate, anything you can think of. My personal favorite is Pussy
Galore...
Wayne Fellows
<mailto:s124@[REMOVE]earthlink.net> wrote:
>>You folks don't seem to have much of a concept of Mac customizability.
It
>>blows away any OS except, perhapse, the various flavors of Unix.
>Oh really? Can you give any examples?
Absolutely, there's nothing like the Mac's Kaleidoscope for WinD'ohs.
Wayne Fellows
wrote:
>> Not true. If you drag a folder to the Recycle Bin, and restore that
folder,
>> all contents go back to their original location. What are you talking
about?
>From my limited use of windows I know what he is talking about.
>Mac: say I have 3 folders, each with about 100 items in the trash. "todo"
>in folder 2, path 2/thingstodo/today was not meant to be thrown away. On
>the mac, everything is in the same folders etc. On windows, their would
>be 300 files you have to wade through to get to it
Yeah, pretty lame implementation, huh?
Lawson English
>
>If I drag a folder called "Junk" to the Recycle Bin which has 100 files in
>it, and I open the Recycle Bin I will see a folder named "Junk".
>
>....I can send you a screen shot if you wish. Unless you are talking about
>something else.
But what if the folder "junk" contains the folder "more junk" which
contains the folder "even more junk" which contains the file "my junk"?
If you "restore" the folder "junk", is my junk still inside even more junk
which is still instde more junk which is still inside junk?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want Apple to license Cyberdog for third-party development? Go to:
<http://www.pcsincnet.com/petition.html>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Ragosta
k...@norfolk-county.com (K. Sebring) wrote:
> In article <6su2uc$5mq$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "Todd Arneson"
> <s124@[REMOVE]earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Wayne Fellows wrote in message ...
> >>On Sat, Sep 5, 1998 8:52 PM, MojiDoji <mailto:no-...@one.net> wrote:
> >>>I agree, Win95/NT is far more configurable than MacOS. But I think OS/2
> >>>should be placed between Linux and Windows.
> >>
> >>
> >>You folks don't seem to have much of a concept of Mac customizability. It
> >>blows away any OS except, perhapse, the various flavors of Unix.
> >
> >
> >Oh really? Can you give any examples?
>
> Tell me one thing that you can customize in WIndows. I'll tell you I can
> do it with the MacOS.
>
> Not to mention:
>
> Kaleidoscope. I can change *every little thing* about the appearance of
> the OS. If you don't believe me, i'll send you a screenshot that is an
> almost exact replica of Windows 95.
You're a glutton for punishment.
>
> AppleScript. I can automate practically *anything* I want to. That's
> customizability.
>
> Various other 3rd party extensions and control panels. Go do a search for
> Mac shareware. You'll find alot.
>
> Just take a look at the included control panels with the MacOS. Unlike
> Windows, which uses Control Panels for entering wads and wads of
> configuration strings, you can actually do things with CDEV's.
>
> There's also ALOT of things about the Finder that can be customized. If
> you REALLY want to hear them, email me. I'll find time.
>
> Hell, you want custom, straight out? I'll send you a screenshot of my
desktop.
>
> >
> >------------------------------
> >Todd
> >s124@earthlink.n*et
> >http://home.earthlink.net/~s124/
> >--
> >AOL IM: AAPLisDUMB; eatAPPLnow; iMac Hater.
> >--
> >ICQ: 14470496
> >--
> >Flames will be cheerfully returned to
> >sender----3,000,000 times.
> >-------------------------------
>
> --
> -----------------------
> k...@norfolk-county.com
> kmsmac on AIM
> ICQ #9251405
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
See the Complete Macintosh Page at its new location:
http://www.taylor-design.com/cMacindex.html
Joe Ragosta
<wfellows@*stop_spam*earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 6, 1998 7:21 PM, Steve Sullivan <mailto:mac...@concentric.net>
> wrote:
> >hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
> >what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
> >it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
>
> Actually you can come close. You can designate the font, change the Apple
> picture, and add colors and textures to the menus. You can also change the
> shape of windowing elemends, so your desktop can look like pretty much
> anything. There are schemes for BeOS, NeXT, the game Fallout, a rusty
> boilerplate, anything you can think of. My personal favorite is Pussy
> Galore...
You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
not a piece of the OS you can't change.
Lawson English
>Joe Ragosta wrote:
>
>> You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
>> not a piece of the OS you can't change.
>
>Good point. Get yourself a hex editor and you can change anything about
>Linux, too.
Ah, but there's a simple hex editor available in ResEdit. Is there a simple
ResEdit available in a hex editor on Linux? ;-)
Steve Sullivan
k...@norfolk-county.com (K. Sebring) wrote:
> >hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
> >what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
> >it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
>
> Come on. You know exactly what Kaliedoscope can do. And you know it's alot.
Actually I have never used it before
> What is it with you, anyways?
I assume you will tell me...
> You act like a fourth grader who, maybe, "tries to be cool" by swaying
> whatever way will get you the most attention. It seems that whenever
> there is an argument, you'll take the side that appears to be "winning".
I take the side that appears to be winning? I always thought I had the
guts to speak what I feel, no matter if its anti mac OR anti windows.
> Why is that? If you deny this, i'll do some Deja searching and come up
> with some examples. But please, don't make me waste my time.
Yes, please do so. I know a bit of mac programming, and as far as I know
its not possible to get rid of the menubar in finder.
Steve Sullivan
> On Sun, Sep 6, 1998 7:21 PM, Steve Sullivan <mailto:mac...@concentric.net>
> wrote:
> >hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
> >what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you customize
> >it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
>
> Actually you can come close. You can designate the font, change the Apple
> picture, and add colors and textures to the menus. You can also change the
> shape of windowing elemends, so your desktop can look like pretty much
> anything. There are schemes for BeOS, NeXT, the game Fallout, a rusty
> boilerplate, anything you can think of. My personal favorite is Pussy
> Galore...
And from what K Sebring said I assume you can get rid of the finder menubar?
Steve Sullivan
joe.r...@dol.net (Joe Ragosta) wrote:
> You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
> not a piece of the OS you can't change.
Sure, but it doesnt mean it will work. If I dont like the menubar, I can
delete it. The os wont work tho. Next people might tell you a menu at
the top wastes screen space. Can you remove the menubar from the top of
the screen?
Dan
>> Not true. If you drag a folder to the Recycle Bin, and restore that
folder,
>> all contents go back to their original location. What are you talking
about?
>
>From my limited use of windows I know what he is talking about.
>Mac: say I have 3 folders, each with about 100 items in the trash. "todo"
>in folder 2, path 2/thingstodo/today was not meant to be thrown away. On
>the mac, everything is in the same folders etc. On windows, their would
>be 300 files you have to wade through to get to it
I'm still not totally clear on either of your explanations.
If I drag a folder called "Junk" to the Recycle Bin which has 100 files in
it, and I open the Recycle Bin I will see a folder named "Junk".
...I can send you a screen shot if you wish. Unless you are talking about
something else.
Dan
WillAdams
of the system, and can do nothing to alter the _functionality_.
Show me a way in Kaledoscope to provide a top level menu entry, with global
keyboard shortcut for "Hide application" and I'll register Kaleidoscope and
install it on my Mac at work.
I don't want eye candy, I want an elegant UI which will make those tasks which
I access the most frequently the most efficient to make use of. The Mac UI is
not that.
William
William Adams
http://members.aol.com/willadams
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Michael J. Peck
> You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
> not a piece of the OS you can't change.
Good point. Get yourself a hex editor and you can change anything about
Linux, too.
MJP
Dan
drag a folder called "Junk" to the Recycle Bin which has 100 files in
>>it, and I open the Recycle Bin I will see a folder named "Junk".
>>
>>something else.
>
>But what if the folder "junk" contains the folder "more junk" which
>contains the folder "even more junk" which contains the file "my junk"?
>
>If you "restore" the folder "junk", is my junk still inside even more junk
>which is still instde more junk which is still inside junk?
Yes. I just tested it. I can drag a folder that goes many folders deep (6 in
my test), with files spread out throughout those folders to the Recycle Bin,
and when I restore the root folder, they all return to their original
location.
Dan
nate
wrote:
>>....I can send you a screen shot if you wish. Unless you are talking about
>>something else.
>
>
>
>But what if the folder "junk" contains the folder "more junk" which
>contains the folder "even more junk" which contains the file "my junk"?
You guys argue over the recycle bin too much. The best thing to do is
turn the damn thing off and pay attention to what you do.
--
Nathan A. Hughes
The University Theatre, KU
http://scenedesign.home.ml.org
Tapella
mac...@concentric.net (Steve Sullivan) wrote:
> In article <joe.ragosta-06...@elk66.dol.net>,
> joe.r...@dol.net (Joe Ragosta) wrote:
>
> > You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
> > not a piece of the OS you can't change.
>
> Sure, but it doesnt mean it will work. If I dont like the menubar, I can
> delete it. The os wont work tho. Next people might tell you a menu at
> the top wastes screen space. Can you remove the menubar from the top of
> the screen?
>
What would you do with a Mac with no menus? Would you want to remove the
menu bars from each Windows window for example? Would you want to remove
the ability to get popup menus in OPENSTEP? It doesn't make sense.
As to the person who wanted a keystroke to "hide application" I've never
done it before but you can use ResEdit to add/remove command-key combos
to applications, so I don't see any reason why you couldn't do that to
the Finder. I like adding "show images" and "reload" to Navigator since
those keystrokes were taken out for some reason. [Note I personally just
option-click the app I'm moving to, which changes to that app and hides
the other one, although it's kind of a "hidden" function.]
Rob.
Steve Sullivan
tap...@pasteur.frANCE (Tapella) wrote:
> > Sure, but it doesnt mean it will work. If I dont like the menubar, I can
> > delete it. The os wont work tho. Next people might tell you a menu at
> > the top wastes screen space. Can you remove the menubar from the top of
> > the screen?
> >
>
> What would you do with a Mac with no menus? Would you want to remove the
> menu bars from each Windows window for example? Would you want to remove
> the ability to get popup menus in OPENSTEP? It doesn't make sense.
Its not that I want a mac with no menus, its that the top menubar takes up
valuable real estate. I would rather have menus on the side, like
openstep. I am sure their are one or two people in CSNA that would like
this with os x server or os x as well
PS: I changed the topic from oSUX
Glen Warner
<mjp...@nstar.net> wrote:
> Joe Ragosta wrote:
>
> > You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
> > not a piece of the OS you can't change.
>
> Good point. Get yourself a hex editor and you can change anything about
> Linux, too.
>
> MJP
That sounds like "Too Much Work". The MacOS is designed to avoid "Too Much
Work".
Using ResEdit, you open a *copy* of the System file. To change the menus,
you open the appropriate resource, add your keyboard combination, change
the name, etc., save and close, and you're done.
What do you have to do with your hex edit method?
--gdw
--
Remove the 'nyet' from the e-mail address, and you'll be all set.
(%*#$&! spammers ....)
Michael J. Peck
> >Good point. Get yourself a hex editor and you can change anything about
> >Linux, too.
>
> Ah, but there's a simple hex editor available in ResEdit. Is there a simple
> ResEdit available in a hex editor on Linux? ;-)
Yes. Run emacs and hit Meta-x, then type "hex-mode". You can hexedit any
file you like.
The point was that "changing anything" in MacOS requires impossible
modifications using a hex editor. Impossible, because without reverse
compilation none of the CODE resources (and custom controls, WDEFS, etc)
will be comprehensible in the least.
So technically speaking, sure! You can change anything in the MacOS,
since the System is nothing more than a simple binary. Change away!
MJP
Ed Deans.
>>>You folks don't seem to have much of a concept of Mac customizability.
>
>>Oh really? Can you give any examples?
>
Never heard of "Window Blinds" I guess, or "Object Desktop's WindowFX
component", or...
Those and Kaleidoscope are complex hacks fraught with incompatibilities.
They do not represent OS customization capability out-of-box.
In terms of out-of-box customization capability OS/2 (perhaps as early as
2.0 in '92) easily surpassed any currently shipping Mac OS. To say
otherwise is to ignore the facts or simply indicative of the ignorance and
misinformation surrounding that long-loathed OS.
On a ISV customization note, due to the ability to subclass parts of the UI,
rather than have to patch as with Mac OS extensions, OS/2 allows programmers
relatively clean pathway to add-on to the system and many have done so.
It's been a shame so many have failed to realize the nature of OS/2's UI is
not skin deep as on Windows and MacOS but backed up by a relatively complex
and capable system of objects.
Windows does not offer this.
Mac OS does not have a stable, clean and reliable method for customizing the
system which is exactly why Apple was dumping the old-style extension method
with Copland and why Mac OS X (at last report, AFAIK) would be extensible
via a new mechanism derived from OPENSTEP's existing facilities.
I am ever surprised Windows does not yet offer scripting on the order of
REXX or AppleScript. I'd expected VB for apps would be extended to the OS
level with Win98--clearly that did not happen.
If Apple does things right, and I'm ever more weary they will from what I
read publicly about Mac OS 8.5 and related things, Mac OS X, with it's Mac
OS & OPENSTEP heritage (plus knowledge gained from the Pink, Taligent and
Copland efforts) ought to bring forth the premier high volume operating
system of the next decade. There's the potential for Mac OS X to redefine
what a modern high volume OS ought to be. I mean on the order of how the Mac
redefined how easy a high volume computer ought to be to used, not simply
raising the bar a feature here and there.
It will likely take a major, critical, Microsoft blunder or fault to weaken
it's intimidatingly dominant place in the market and a near perfect
execution by Apple for Apple to make headway significant enough to ensure
long term survival and moderate growth. It will take that and a more
substantial effort at differentiation and greater leverage of NeXT and other
technologies in its portfolio to make it a serious competitor again. This
may not happen within even 10 years. IMO, this is Apple's "reconstruction"
phase.
From my POV, we're in the least competitive general purpose app and OS
personal computer market in memory. I'm still unconvinced Jobs wasn't right
a few years back when he predicted a Microsoft-dominated 'dark ages' for the
industry.
--Ed.
Michael Peck
> That sounds like "Too Much Work". The MacOS is designed to avoid "Too Much
> Work".
>
> Using ResEdit, you open a *copy* of the System file. To change the menus,
> you open the appropriate resource, add your keyboard combination, change
> the name, etc., save and close, and you're done.
All true, happily. ResEdit is a very nice program. Regardless, you'll
note that Joe Ragosta said:
> You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
> not a piece of the OS you can't change.
</quote>
> What do you have to do with your hex edit method?
You edit the hex, just as you would if you were to change, for instance,
the location of the MacOS menu bar. Can you tell me how to do that?
MJP
Tapella
mac...@concentric.net (Steve Sullivan) wrote:
> Its not that I want a mac with no menus, its that the top menubar takes up
> valuable real estate. I would rather have menus on the side, like
> openstep. I am sure their are one or two people in CSNA that would like
> this with os x server or os x as well
Well, the program GIF Converter has a menu option to remove the menu bar,
so I guess it is possible. (I checked and you can move folders, etc. into
the space where the menubar is and still see them, so it's real desktop
space.)
Frankly, I'm not convinced that a vertical menu bar is actually superior.
The only advantage it has is scalability -- it's possible to fill up the
Mac menubar, but there's pretty much no way you'll have the 30-60 top-level
menu options that would be required to fill a NeXT menubar. Another
possibility is that it's marginally faster because menus are closer to
each other -- but this is also a drawback because now it's also easier
to overshoot your selection, so you have to move in a more controlled and
thus slower manner over the smaller distance. Regardless, we're talking
fractions of a second. [Note I've very little experience with vertical
menus, but this seems to be the case with me -- maybe I'm just not used to
them yet?]
A menu bar on top doesn't really that up that much real estate, and it's
consistent (ie, it's not a random chunk in the corner, it's a constant
strip on the edge of your screen). Also, it's easier to select options
with the greater target area of a horizontal selection (the width of the
word rather than the height). I don't think you really gain that much
usable screen area by switching from Mac-style to NeXT-style, although it
might seem that way. [Note you pretty much lose the benefits of horizontal
menus with the
Windows system of not having them at the edge of the screen, and also allowing
them to loop around to multiple lines. Doh.]
Sum up: Mac style is less scalable, and possibly slower (BAD) but more
consistent, more accurate, and probably easier to use (GOOD).
But I digress.
Anyway, I'm sure Apple can do that -- I don't see why it would be so hard
to allow hiding the menubar and/or making a NeXT-style vertical menu chunk.
Although I'm not sure that this is really "What we need from Mac OSX". I
have no idea how much Apple is focusing on a modifiable and scalable
interface re-design.
Rob.
Michelle L. Buck
Tapella wrote in message ...
[...]
>
>Sum up: Mac style is less scalable, and possibly slower (BAD) but more
>consistent, more accurate, and probably easier to use (GOOD).
>But I digress.
>
>
>Rob.
The Mac style is not more consistent. The Openstep vertical menu has the
same minimum set of items in every application. There are standard
locations for most common capabilities.
You credit the Mac menu for being more accurate based on the size of the
menu items. Openstep vertical menu items are or can be by preference the
same size. Each item is just as wide and just as tall.
As to easier and accuracy: Humans are better able to select items from a
list that is arranged vertically. Look at a phone book. How do you write
your shopping list ? People generally put their finger and their focus at
the top of a column and slide their finger and focus down the list to the
selected item. Most people find the hand motion required to move the mouse
vertically somewhat less tiring than moving horizontally.
My personal opinion is that the Openstep style vertical menus are far
superior to the Mac menus in every regard. Many of the same people who
created the Mac menu system went on to build the vertical menus. Maybe they
had a reason.
Karl Knechtel
: In article <macghod-0609...@sdn-ar-001casbarp166.dialsprint.net>,
: mac...@concentric.net (Steve Sullivan) wrote:
: > In article <joe.ragosta-06...@elk66.dol.net>,
: > joe.r...@dol.net (Joe Ragosta) wrote:
: >
: > > You can change _ANYTHING_ about Mac OS. Get yourself ResEdit and there's
: > > not a piece of the OS you can't change.
: >
: > Sure, but it doesnt mean it will work. If I dont like the menubar, I can
: > delete it. The os wont work tho. Next people might tell you a menu at
: > the top wastes screen space. Can you remove the menubar from the top of
: > the screen?
: >
: What would you do with a Mac with no menus? Would you want to remove the
: menu bars from each Windows window for example? Would you want to remove
: the ability to get popup menus in OPENSTEP? It doesn't make sense.
: As to the person who wanted a keystroke to "hide application" I've never
: done it before but you can use ResEdit to add/remove command-key combos
: to applications, so I don't see any reason why you couldn't do that to
: the Finder. I like adding "show images" and "reload" to Navigator since
: those keystrokes were taken out for some reason. [Note I personally just
: option-click the app I'm moving to, which changes to that app and hides
: the other one, although it's kind of a "hidden" function.]
: Rob.
BTW While using Hypercard you can hide the menubar with Command-space.
Karl Knechtel {:-#>
da728 at torfree dot net
Sean Luke
[regarding OpenStep versus Mac menus]
: As to easier and accuracy: Humans are better able to select items from a
: list that is arranged vertically. Look at a phone book. How do you write
: your shopping list ? People generally put their finger and their focus at
: the top of a column and slide their finger and focus down the list to the
: selected item. Most people find the hand motion required to move the mouse
: vertically somewhat less tiring than moving horizontally.
While I personally much prefer OpenStep windows to Mac windows, your
statement above has no basis in evidence. The reason lists are arranged
vertically is that we can pack more items vertically than horizontally. It
has little to do with our cognitive speed in picking items out of vertical
lists.
It's not a very important issue IMHO, but in fact we are much faster at
grokking horizontal lists of pure text than vertical ones. Even in
NeXTSTEP, this leaks through: for a non-menu example, consider the typical
arrangement of yes/no/cancel buttons on a dialog box. The chief time we
arrange things vertically is when (1) they have no associated text to
dictate flow (for example, an icon bar), or (2) they're meant to *look*
like written lists (radio buttons, say).
: My personal opinion is that the Openstep style vertical menus are far
: superior to the Mac menus in every regard.
Nonsense.
1) OpenStep menus are far more difficult to hit.
2) OpenStep submenus hang so they're aligned with the top of the main
menu, a clearly inferior approach.
Just because one likes OpenStep menus doesn't mean one has to exaggerate
their advantages.
: Many of the same people who
: created the Mac menu system went on to build the vertical menus. Maybe they
: had a reason.
I can think of not one person working for NeXT who was on the original
Mac/Lisa team. Do you know something we don't? Real or imagined
advantages aside, the chief reason why many of the elements in NeXTSTEP
were different from the Mac was to only to make the Cube _look_ different.
Distinctly non-Apple. This was both for marketing :-) and legal :-(
reasons.
Sean Luke
se...@cs.umd.edu
spag...@my-dejanews.com
> Michelle L. Buck (buck...@mcleod.net) wrote:
> : Many of the same people who
> : created the Mac menu system went on to build the vertical menus. Maybe they
> : had a reason.
>
> I can think of not one person working for NeXT who was on the original
> Mac/Lisa team.
Steve Jobs?
Stefano Pagiola
---
My opinions alone
Longtime MacOS and NeXTSTEP user, reluctant Windows 95/NT user, future
Rhapsody user
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Gerard Motola
Joe Ragosta wrote in message ...
>In article <B2187B8...@153.36.240.74>, "Wayne Fellows"
><wfellows@*stop_spam*earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 6, 1998 7:21 PM, Steve Sullivan
<mailto:mac...@concentric.net>
>> wrote:
>> >hmmm, I am not familiar with this. You can change every little thing?
>> >what about big things, such as the menubar at the top? Can you
customize
>> >it so it is a replica of openstep 4.2 interface?
>>
>> Actually you can come close. You can designate the font, change the
Apple
>> picture, and add colors and textures to the menus. You can also change
the
>> shape of windowing elemends, so your desktop can look like pretty much
>> anything. There are schemes for BeOS, NeXT, the game Fallout, a rusty
>> boilerplate, anything you can think of. My personal favorite is Pussy
>> Galore...
>
>not a piece of the OS you can't change.
>
>Regards,
>
>Joe Ragosta
>See the Complete Macintosh Page at its new location:
>http://www.taylor-design.com/cMacindex.html
Is there a Windows 95 equivalent of ResEdit?
Matt Kennel
: <horizontal vs vertical menus>
:
:My personal opinion is that the Openstep style vertical menus are far
:superior to the Mac menus in every regard. Many of the same people who
:created the Mac menu system went on to build the vertical menus. Maybe they
:had a reason.
I like OpenStep menus too, but some of the reasons the NeXT was
different was that Apple viewed NeXT as traitorous enemies and would
have sued the bejeezus out of them if they used various characteristic
elements of the Mac interface. I had once heard that they considered
the classic pop-down menus with mouse dragging an Apple-proprietary
technique.
Naturally this just showed how dumb Apple was--instead NeXT should have
been viewed as their real "advanced technology research division" and
reabsorbed some time later. Because they were afraid of Jobs, they didn't.
Out! Out, Demons of Stupidity!.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
Steve Hix
mbkennel <replace this with '@'> yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 1998 12:35:29 -0500, Michelle L. Buck wrote:
> : <horizontal vs vertical menus>
> :
> :My personal opinion is that the Openstep style vertical menus are far
> :superior to the Mac menus in every regard. Many of the same people who
> :created the Mac menu system went on to build the vertical menus. Maybe they
> :had a reason.
>
> I like OpenStep menus too, but some of the reasons the NeXT was
> different was that Apple viewed NeXT as traitorous enemies and would
> have sued the bejeezus out of them if they used various characteristic
> elements of the Mac interface. I had once heard that they considered
> the classic pop-down menus with mouse dragging an Apple-proprietary
> technique.
>
> Naturally this just showed how dumb Apple was--instead NeXT should have
> been viewed as their real "advanced technology research division" and
> reabsorbed some time later. Because they were afraid of Jobs, they didn't.
>
> Out! Out, Demons of Stupidity!.
But they *did* reabsorb them.
Took a long time, though.