Date:         Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:04:13 -0700
Reply-To:     Johnny DeVilla <johnny@JDEVILLA.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Johnny DeVilla <johnny@JDEVILLA.COM>
Subject:      Re: It's a Beautiful Day in America!...
Comments: To: Jim <jrasite@EONI.COM>
In-Reply-To:  <3F1DE82C.9040607@eoni.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

Ah some sense of reason. Now to sync my ipod and jump in my Vanagon.
Oh and maybe take my iBook with me to sniff out some windoz users
unguarded wifi system. A Westfalia makes such a good mobile office.



Johnny
81 Westy




On Tuesday, July 22, 2003, at 06:43 PM, Jim wrote:

> I was going to stay out of this, but.....
>
> Most of the comments I've read here today preface with, "Personally I
> don't use a Mac..." I'd offer that that's akin to saying, "Personally,
> I
> don't drive..." when posting a criticism of or comments regarding
> Vanagons on the Vanagon list. Drive a Mac for a year or two, THEN
> experss your opinion.
>
> <OPIN>
> Personally, in my business I support both Windows and Mac systems.
> With
> the release of XP and OS X, the operating systems are very similar in
> 'look and feel'. The advantage of the Microsoft product is the 95%
> market penetration.  The advantage of OS X is Apple's control of both
> the hardware and the software.  The disadvantage of Microsoft's product
> is that it must run on an incredible variety of hardware
> configurations.
> This leads to bloated software. The disadvantage of Apple's product is
> 5% market penetration. (Actually something like 3% these days...)
> However, I can run nearly any Windows program (including the all
> important ETKA) on my Mac.  I don't think you can run iTunes, iMovie,
> iPhoto or Safari on your Windows platform..... I work on both
> platforms,
> and my home systems are Macs and Mac clones. Eventually, the open
> source
> initiative may do them both in. (One can always hope. )
> </OPIN>
>
> But... The reason I had to write was to question the statement, "You
> mean like Microsoft who wrote the first Apple operating system?"
> Aristotle, cite your source... My research shows,
>
> "DOS and ProDOS are operating systems designed by Apple Computer, Inc.
> to run in the 8-bit Apple II line of computers. DOS was released for
> the
> Apple II in the late 1970's and was later replaced with ProDOS. ProDOS
> is much easier to use than DOS. Apple has always had an ease of use
> philosophy. You can tell by reading their older Apple II DOS or ProDOS
> manuals. They have always strived to make the computer experience as
> humanistic as possible. DOS and ProDOS are text-line OS's and as such
> are inherently harder to use than a GUI OS. Attempts to add a GUI to
> the
> older 8-bit Apple II's (not withstanding the 16-bit IIgs) have all
> pretty much fallen flat. The Apple II simply does not have the
> graphical
> capabilities to support a convincing GUI. The Apple II, excluding the
> later IIgs, is a text-line machine, take it or leave it. You might
> expect that as a text-line machine, it would be hard to use and
> cryptic,
> especially if you are familiar with text-line operating systems like
> MSDOS. DOS and ProDOS were designed with as few keywords as possible.
> It
> was designed to make the levels of abstraction as few as possible.
> These
> OS's are simple, elegant, and fun to use. They do not tax the user with
> multitudes of cryptic commands and hard to remember procedures. It is
> no
> wonder that the company that produced these powerfully simple text-line
> OS's eventually changed the world with the MacOS GUI."
> <http://homepage.mac.com/vectronic/appleii/dos.html>
>
> You might also take a look at
> <http://www.chips.navy.mil/archives/02_fall/index2_files/
> briefhistory2.htm>
>
> I'll shut up now.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
Johnny DeVilla
Home 323.257.1377
Cell 323 829.1399
IM Jdvlla
Email devilla@adelphia.net