Re: What has changed in the Apple world last 6 months?

[Roy and/or Janet Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

Dennis Doms wrote:

> [You know, I usually just lurk past these discussions, but I think
> this one has been pretty good.]
>
> To visit back to the digital camera issue: I consider them a niche
> product, but an important one. They're the modern "replacement" for
> the hold "Polaroid" concept. They're more expensive, but they have
> three advantages: immediacy (when you absolutely, positively, have to
> have it right _now_), resolution (_better_ than a Polaroid),  and
> operation cost (Polaroid film was _expensive_). In certain
> applications (high volume of "instant shots" required), it's a
> no-brainer. Post-shot scanning is feasible, but it removes the
> immediacy, consumes a fair amount of time, and adds another layer for
> distortion.

But a Polaroid is still cheaper (at least in the relative short run) over a
digital camera. Even when using a scanner with it.

>
>
> In article <3a326f76$1@news.svn.net>, "Paul Grammens"
> <grammens@svn.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Howe Family <khowe@omninet.net.au> wrote
> >>
> >> There are many WSIWYG word processors for the GS. I regularly use the
> >> word processing module of AppleworksGS in preference to the many more
> >> modern machines I have at my disposal.
> >
> >Sorry, but my IIgs screen resolution is so inferior to my PC's 17" monitor,
> >I wouldn't consider doing word processing on it.
>
> Someone mentioned text over GUI for some purposes, which is true; GUI
> for a specific task isn't always better. However, GUI gives you
> multiwindowing,

One doesn't need a GUI for multiwindowing. I've had several MS-DOS applications
that do multiple windows and all were in pure text mode. In fact, with an XT and
Herc or MDA, text mode was blazingly fast compared to running an EGA with Windows
on a 6 mhz AT.

> and with most people wanting to combine applications,
> that  _is_ no longer a capability that can be sacrificed.

Even today though, MOST people aren't multitasking, but task switching, and even
a humble //e with enough memory and the right software (like the TO series) can
do that very well.

> And the
> interaction is more seamless if everything is GUI.

Not so. Many times applications running under GUIs don't follow standards with
their menus. Even the Mac doesn't MAKE the programmer use the same standard - but
the buying public with Macs have avoided programs that don't.

I'm not opposed to GUIs, but it isn't necessary to have a graphical interface to
have windows, or seamless interfacing. One thing is sure though - it takes more
CPU horsepower to do a GUI than text, programming capability being equal.

Roy

>
>
> > The GS boots up quicker than the
> >> modern machines.
> >
> >That's a good point, and one that I find very amusing. We've really gone
> >backwards there, many of my old computers boot from ROM long before the
> >monitor has warmed up enough to display the screen.  Quite a contrast to
> >booting any of the newer OS's on the fastest modern hardware.
>
> Alan Cooper's _The Inmates are Running the Asylum: Why High Tech
> Products Drive Us Crazy & How to Restore the Sanity_ talks about the
> frustration of having _cameras_ with OS's that take moments to boot
> up. :)
>
> >> >
> >> I am very pleased with the way my
> >> GS web browser is coming along. It is never going to provide the speed
> >> and power of a full browser on a new machine, but I think it will end up
> >> providing a pleasant web browsing experience with acceptable performance.
> >>
> >
> >More power to you, then. Myself, I use the web for business, I need features
> >that are unlikely to ever be available on my IIgs's.
>
> And this is the fundamental problem. It can be argued for another
> couple of decades whether the Apple II technology could have been
> extended to be competitive. But by deciding not to support the
> technology or the user base, Apple made that decision for everyone.
>
> Worse, Apple began enforcing  that decision years before killing off
> the machine by restricting the marketing of the machine to education,
> then to lower grade ranges, etc.
>
> >> Any computer is a combination of hardware and software. These days we
> >> have incredible processing power connected to terribly inefficient and
> >> buggy software.
> >
> >Can't argue with that. Thanks for the thoughtful post.
> >-Paul
>
> I wonder how many Apple II people would react to an AppleWorks PDA
> that ran their Apple II software? I might be interested in that
> combination. :)
>
> I don't play with my Apples much any more, but I keep them. There is
> something about having a machine where you know you (as an individual)
> can actually have intimate knowledge of nearly _all_ its workings.
> That's more applicable to a non-IIgs Apple II (GS/OS is a lot of
> software to deconstruct), but the nuances of MacOS, Windows, etc. can
> overload even talented software and hardware engineers.
>
>  --
> Dennis Doms  SynABit@kc.invalid
> [ObSpamFoil: substitute "rr.com" for "invalid" above to reply via mail.]
> "In the end, only kindness matters." - "Hands", Jewel Kilcher