Re: GenieLamp editorial

[sbehrens@contech.demon.co.uk (Soenke Behrens)]

wily@svpal.svpal.org (Paul Creager) wrote:

>Already software developers are writing the Windows version first, with 
>the Mac version following months (or years) later.  Sound familiar?
>
>If and when Apple goes under, is bought out, or whatever, I won't be too sad.

You should be. Where would PC operating systems be today if it weren't for
the Mac? You said yourself: Windows95 is more Mac-like than ever. In other
words: MS copies, they do not invent. Where will the driving force behind
GUI development and "friendly" computing be?

(Never mind that the Mac isn't friendly as in "this is as it should be".
But it's friendly as in "compare this to a Win machine". And improving.)

I wish Apple a long and plentiful life. They _got_ to rethink their
approach, though, the Mac _urgently_ needs a new niche. Alarming sign #1: I
recently got a company brochure in PageMaker format ... done not on a Mac,
but on a Windows machine. A true first: So far, _everything_ came in Mac
format.

It is no longer sufficient to have The Finder. Windows95 has The Finder,
OS/2 has The Finder, NT will have The Finder. Different versions of The
Finder, but the idea remains. Now Apple have to offer something else.

I liked Dave Whiner's idea of the Mac as the ultimate net.tool. Like,
integrate Internet connectivity _right_ into the OS. Be able to specify a
URL in an Open File dialog (or a Save File one, as that). To me, that
really makes sense: _I_ can use Internet on a Windows machine (or a
Windows95 one). I wouldn't wish it on the casual user. A dozen programs
that have to interact correctly, and don't screw up your winsock setup,
son. A machine that integrated Internet access truly seamlessly into the OS
could go a _long_ way.

Soenke
--
I don't know what it is he's doing, it must be art