Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!news.unimelb.EDU.AU!munnari.OZ.AU!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!gidora.kralizec.net.au!janis.virago.org.au!news
From: rachel@juno.virago.org.au (Rachel Polanskis)
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: 21 Apr 1996 04:09:26 GMT
Organization: Virago Computer Systems
Lines: 123
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <4lccdm$8pf@janis.virago.org.au>
References: <Cyclone-0504961737500001@dial24.trip.net>
<31678d59.1170056@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <4k8hkj$o0u@cloner3.netcom.com>
<sonikd-0804960027040001@cmh-p062.infinet.com>
<avi-0904962303220001@cyber128.cyberspc.mb.ca>
<316c1d48.41833268@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
<John_Warwick-1004962314430001@news.mindlink.net>
<4kq463$7a4@informer1.cis.mcmaster.ca>
<Pine.A32.3.91.960417014401.76675F-100000@green.weeg.uiowa.edu>
<chrisc-1904961301260001@ppp-69.cet.com>
Reply-To: r.polanskis@nepean.uws.edu.au,grove@zeta.org.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup46.syd1.zeta.org.au
X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc:35029 alt.binaries.warez.mac:3360 comp.os.linux.advocacy:46608 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:124699 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:22692 comp.os.msdos.misc:53796 comp.os.os2.advocacy:195484 comp.sys.acorn.advocacy:8632 comp.sys.mac.advocacy:101117 comp.sys.next.advocacy:34956 comp.sys.powerpc.advocacy:2998 comp.unix.advocacy:19845 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:17850 comp.unix.bsd.misc:798 comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:3244 comp.unix.machten:2302 comp.unix.pc-clo
ne.16bit:705 comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:9263 comp.unix.shell:31882 comp.unix.solaris:66646 comp.unix.user-friendly:3636
Hello,
I don't normally participate in advocacy wars, but:
1: I support an office split with 50/50 PCs and Macs.
It would appear that both PCs and Macs have their place, but,
when it comes to support, the Mac is a NIGHTMARE.
Reason: It is a BLACK BOX. You cannot reconfigure a driver to get around
a defective piece of hardware, nor can you enter the system in
the same way as you can a PC if the software configuration is
wrong or broken. If you want to make a system disk on a PC,
to bypass the C: drive the function is supported no matter what
PC you use. On a Mac you must have the OS available (not always
possible) and then if you do have a boot disk, there is no
guarantee it will work anyway because it may not be the same
architecture as the Mac you are trying to rescue.
You might need to have Norton handy, which costs - and even then
it is not always handy either...
If you have a hardware failure on a Mac, it's off to the repair
shop, with all your work, and your files and maybe it just
happens to be your office too. Macs are expensive to repair
because the parts have to come from a PROPRIETRY SOURCE, and parts
are not always available. Through this time, you are without a
machine, maybe for WEEKS.
A PC however can have the offending component removed and
replaced in a few hours and you are back on line. Discounting head
crashes of course which can affect any machine.
Hardware wise the Macintrash is a real bother - especially when
it is a mission critical situation.
2: Mac Users are the first to put their hands up for help when
problems strike.
Reason:
Macs do not teach people about computers. Macs do not teach people
good computing practices as a side effect.
People on a PC learn Disk Management and the importance of
correct file naming techniques and formats, as it is important to
the architecture of the MSDOS O/S.
Consequently, it is far easier to demonstrate the benefits and
theory of MIME file naming conventions to a PC user as they already
are familiar with file extension, for example.
Macs do not teach Disk Management as the user is free to stuff
files and "folders" where they like, without regard for any kind
of hierarchical structure. The Finder does it all for them, and
many Mac users don't even know how to use that...
Macs do not teach good file management standards - You may make a
file any arbitrary length (up to 32 chars) and it may include
spaces or other non standard character types.
This wreaks havoc with UNIX and MSDOS O/S as they cannot support
this witchery without great pain. While Mac users pat themselves
on the back for the "friendly" file conventions - any kind of
interoperability with other systems is precluded. Examples include
PC/Unix users having to deal with Binhex, or truncated file names
with missing extensions (or too many extensions) which spoils
registration/association info databases - such as found in MSWindows.
The result is that PC users struggle to load files received in
email attachments that have no standard extension that either
they or their system can identify meaning that the use of helper
programs to do autoloading of files is prevented.
The other spinoff to this is that the mac users themselves are
oblivious to the fact they are causing problems - and too
shortsighted to anticipate the existence of other Systems.
Mac Users do not know how to spell PORTABILITY or INTEROPERABILITY.
The training of Mac Users in these and the above concepts is
thwarted because of the laxness the Mac O/S allows in file/disk
management strategies.
Macs are *not* contrary to popular belief more sophisticated for
this reason. The structures used are PROPRIETRY and therefore not
allowed to be released to other O/Ss.
Apart from file and Disk management issues - which seem to be
very common calls for help I receive when a Mac user misplaces a
file, or a PC user receives a Mac attachment with a mangled
filename, the very abstraction of the Mac O/S itself often hinders
both the user and the sysop who looks after the machine.
This is true because the GUI of the Mac is *not* intuitive as we
are lead to believe - and the single button mouse and combination of
accelerator keys is not very clear to the average user.
Many of the combinations are non standard even across Windows and
Mac software of the same type (eg. Word processors)
This abstraction is also apparent if trying to diagnose a Mac error:
Where is the mac equivalent of "Doctor Watson" or Truss?
I could go on - but i won't. I think I have made my point, but the Mac is
*not* suited to the Mission Critical or heavy usage office environment.
(Neither is the PC, but it *is* a little better).
While I support macs and Pc's and consider myself proficient in
both (Windows has it's problems too - *I KNOW*) - at both the
Hardware and software levels, My preferred Operating Systems at
home? :
SPARC Solaris and Linux.
My home is Apple free and Microsoft free.
Rachel
(who uses a UNIX system to relax at home after fixing all those
"friendly" GUI systems)
Never Trust a Computer that Smiles at You.
--
Rachel Polanskis Kingswood, Greater Western Sydney, Australia
grove@zeta.org.au http://www.zeta.org.au/~grove/grove.html
r.polanskis@nepean.uws.edu.au http://www.nepean.uws.edu.au/library/
"When the revolution comes, I will be shot by both sides"