[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: OS For IIGS

On Wed, 26 Nov 1997 16:00:31 -0500, hattonr@aug.com (Rick Hatton) wrote:

>> There are dozens of things Windows 95 has that are completely lacking in
>> MacOS, > or similiar features that are executed in a much better and
>> efficent way. Multitasking is just one of many examples.
>
>Well, a Mac coopertively multitasks, but it does multitask. W95 does
>pre-emptively multitask, but only 32 bit apps. Most of my work apps are
>still 16 bit.

Calling that "multitasking" just makes you look stupid.  Funny how the Win95
boxes I've seen multitask even the lowliest 16-bit apps surprisingly well ( you
don't want to know what this machine is doing now ).

>> As for hardware, that is also far ahead of the Macintosh. > PowerPC RISC
>processor being a notiable exception, however The Mac has standard
>built-in sound input/output. SCSI is standard on al Macs. inexpensive
>networkingis on all Mac. Ethernet is built in on many. Multiple monitor
>capability in in every Mac. The PowrePC is clearly superior and the G3
>just came out.

Given price points, you can have a name-brand PC with the same equipment,
working better, for less.  SCSI is "standard" on all Macs, but no two Macs are
compatible with each other.  Ethernet is "standard" if you don't mind detail
variants with their own buggy behavior coming out each month.  Oh, and let's
talk about that superior operating system.

>If W95 was so great, I wouldnt have bought my new PPC. I use W95 at
>work, so Iuse VirtualPC at home to use the 1-2 apps from work at home.
>.. but I USE my Mac, I PLAY with my Mac...
>
>I HATE that damn W95 machine.

Hate it all you want, but it's a better platform than a Macintosh.





KCUF airmaster
<http://www.kcuf.org/radio/index.html>
net radio: punk, jazz, metal, ambient 
underground music 24-7-365 worldwide