Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!vic.news.telstra.net!act.news.telstra.net!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!news3.ottawa.istar.net!istar.net!news2.ottawa.istar.net!news.pathcom.com!usenet From: ted@pathway1.pathcom.com (Ted) Newsgroups: alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc,alt.binaries.warez.mac,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.acorn.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.powerpc.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.machten,comp.unix.pc-clone.16bit,comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.solaris,comp.unix.user-friendly Subject: Re: FIVE GOOD REASONS WHY IBM'S ARE BETTER THAN MACS (only five?) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 06:59:01 GMT Organization: Pathway Communications Lines: 64 Distribution: inet Message-ID: <317f1ebb.6093447@news.pathcom.com> References: <Cyclone-0504961737500001@dial24.trip.net> <31664662.1081143@153.2.170.10> <dke-0604960729360001@adnline68.adnc.com> <31678d59.1170056@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <4k8hkj$o0u@cloner3.netcom.com> <sonikd-0804960027040001@cmh-p062.infinet.com> <316da1c3.162268208@news.compassnet.com> <avi-1404962057240001@cyber122.cyberspc.mb.ca> <4kvtmu$map@prometheus.algonet.se> <4l1krd$gs2@news.asiapac.net> <4la8jq$d9o@nntp.snfc21.pbi.net> <avi-2404962143580001@cyber170.cyberspc.mb.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: ts12l6.pathcom.com X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99d/16.182 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc:35488 alt.binaries.warez.mac:3579 comp.os.linux.advocacy:47136 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:125508 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:23160 comp.os.msdos.misc:54203 comp.os.os2.advocacy:196816 comp.sys.acorn.advocacy:8754 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:102054 comp.sys.next.advocacy:35048 comp.sys.powerpc.advocacy:3111 comp.unix.advocacy:20009 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:18175 comp.unix.bsd.misc:848 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3376 comp.unix.machten:2347 comp.unix.pc-clo ne.16bit:736 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:9294 comp.unix.shell:32067 comp.unix.solaris:67077 comp.unix.user-friendly:3677 avi@cyberspc.mb.ca (Avi) wrote: >In article <4la8jq$d9o@nntp.snfc21.pbi.net>, muy@muy.muy (MACS SUCK) wrote: > >> SomeOne wrote: >> Macs are supposed to be simple UNTIL you want to upgrade >> Like: >> add ram >> speed up processor without buy a new computer >> installing a modem > >and likewise... plug in turn on. No argument that when Mac's plug and play works, it works well! Mind you I mistakenly plugged in a new piggy back card and a new CD Rom and turned the computer on and as I see the Win95 logo show up I hit myself in the head and curse the fact I didn't set the drivers up first. Only to find that the new card, new CD Rom and the attached 3 drive on the piggy back card are all recognized and functioning. However... when plug and play in a Mac doesn't work, get ready to spend money. We have a few Mac's at my work, primarily for graphics, and normally it works well, but if it doesn't you have to either send the machine to Apple or bring in the local techie. VERY EXPENSIVE. >> And most of all MACS cant run WINDOWS 95!! A far superior operating >> system!!! Since it was written in 95!!! Mac/OS has been the same for >> a thousand years so it is outdated and slow!! >Troll... > >You've never seen 7.5 have you? Don't use the Troll word. It's childish. If you want to be taken seriously act like man. You are correct that the Mac interface has been around for a while, but it has some huge weaknesses and in the latest comparison by both PC and Windows magazine, it rates as roughly equivalent to W95 and OS/2. Some parts better, some parts worse. >...and into my kill file he goes... Your choice, but I would suggest that both sides of this argument have lost their view. The PC is without a doubt the superior boy on the block because the 3rd party world has assisted it's development. Apple has reaped what it has sown by being totally propietary and only now in a desperate move to save itself has made a deal with Motorolla and other 3rd party players. But the reality is that Apple has served a purpose of keeping Microsoft in line and if it fails we will be poorly served by the giant that awaits. >Historical Landmark #9678023 > >Windows 95: Five years ago, corporate software giant, Microsoft, >spent millions of dollars, and put a team of hundreds of highly >specialized programmers on an extensive and highly ambitious project >to find another name for the Apple Menu. Cute story. A complete bald faced lie of course. You are probably thinking of the Visicalc/Lotus reality. Ted