The following files (listed in the order in which they appear) were compiled by: Tim Bailen MACVSIBM.TXT - Original file PCVSMAC.TXT - rebuttal to MACVSIBM.TXT MCVSIBM2.TXT - rebuttal to PCVSMAC.TXT PCVSMAC2.TXT - final words from PCVSMAC author MACBULL.TXT - more support for IBM by someone else Sorry about the formatting for the first document, I had to strip some control codes out and do a lot of reformatting. Enjoy, although I really doubt that these files will change anybodys mind about the computer they like. It seems you either hate Macs or love 'em. About the only use I can see for these files are for you to cheer on your favorite... MACVSPC.TXT I am here to debate which is the smarter buy for your money: A Macintosh or an IBM PC ( or compatible ). I know there is a long, ongoing debate on which is better, but I cannot stand what is going on. Stores such as Best Buy selling PC's like they are the best thing since sliced bread. They are, you say?I THINK NOT! I know you're about sick of this discussion, but hear ( or read ) me out.This text file is meant to settle this argument once & for all. I welcome E-Mail from anyone & I can be reached in the following places:AOL: BVBrain Exec-PC: Brian Verre CI$: Not yet! InterNet: BVBrain.aol@comNow to the nitty-gritty. I admit the PC is a good computer. However, it is getting along in age, and becoming outdated by newer, faster, superior computers. You say I'm full of it, I'm a fool. I'm not. The IBM computers ( excuse me for this, but I'm not going to say "or compatible " everytime I mention a PC ). are falling behind, constantly. The Windows idea was an attempt. But if you look at it, Microsoft was feebly trying to copy the Macintosh. Sure it's legal, definently immoral, but in fact it's downright plaguerism. Plain & Simple. Windows 3.1 is nice but incredibly inferior to a Macintosh interface ( which, for the duration of this article [series?] will be refered to as a MacGUI & the PC a WinGUI ). Windows NT will be even better than 3.1, but still worthless compared to the Macintosh System 7.1. Again the ninnies at MicroSoft are ripping off apple. Now a windows compatible QuickTime will be initiated. O/S 2 is fast, but unpractical. A 486sx w/ 4 megs RAM & at least a 80 meg HD ( 40 MB's would be filled w/ O/S 2.0 ). Another problem with it would be the lack of programs. O/S 2.0 will not ever gain acclaim as a common operating system. In many, many ways Windows is worthless.Another way IBM is behind is it's basic file storage/ 11 chars max ( including the THREE letter indentifier. ). Three chars? Excuse me, but I call that crap. On the Mac, you have up to 31 chars to name your file, in any caps. The file indentifiers ( you know, like .EXE ) are stored in the files info. So a file withe type "TEXT" & the creator "MSWD" would be double clicked ( or launched from within a shell, whatever you prefer ) and would be opened into Microsoft Word. Same with other files. This allows each file to have a unique icons, etc.Even more technically, a IBM PC's files are stored in one data fork. Aaaaan! Wrong answer. If you changed the file identifier from say, .EXE to .TXT you would have a major disaster. On a Mac that would not happen. Why not? On a Mac, data is stored in two data forks. One, the resource fork contains mostly regulated resources that have four char names. Such as "CODE" resources for applications. "DITL" would hold coordinates for a window. Etc. There is also a data fork that goes unregulated, and can be used by applications for whatever they want.This brings us to another point. There is no standard for drawing things on the PC. Most applications use either ANSI or have there own process for drawing things on the screen. This is just another thing that bogs down the speed of the already outdated CPU. On the Mac it is very regulated, having 32-bit color QuickDraw and regulated resources standard. Most people say these things make the Macintosh a bitch to program on ( which we will get into later ). Not true. You may have to call the Mac Tool Box ( again, we will get to this later ), etc, but for example, drawing a line on the screen would be very simple compared to a PC. You would make a window call, then give the coordinates for the line. On a PC, you would have to go through a tenacious process of making ( or using some NON-STANDARD process ) to draw the line directly to the screen. This is crap. No way, jose!People call the Macintosh a game machine. THERE IS NO POSSIBLE REASON FOR SAYING THIS. ALL THE GAMES ARE ON PCs! All the real men use Pc's... ...as expensive paper weights. They are in all ways inferior. If a Mac is such a game machine, why do expensive TV & Movies use them for graphics? I know a person who worked on Terminator II, and what did they use? Macs, of course. The toon cult Ren & Stimpy are drawn on Macs. Many prominent magazines are designed on MAcintosh computer's. The Macintosh is FAR from a game machine.You say a Intel 486sx is a workhorse? It may be, but it is a slower work- horse than a Motorola 68040. It runs at 66MHz? So? A 33MHz 68040 actually outpreforms it with a 128k cache. Motorola processors, because of their new design can preform approx 2 instructions per clock cycle. The "Pentium" (586) will have 3,000,000 transistors? So? The 68060, a generation ahead because Motorola skipped the 68050, ( They liked the radical new design of the 68060 better ) will contain 3mil transistors and as usual, out preform the 586. Possibly even the 686. It will also run at 66MHz.While we're on the subject of processors, lets talk PowerPC. Why is it in construction? "To bridge the gap between the two giants". Ya, nice try guys. The real reason is because IBM is dying, having lost 6 billion dollars in the last term. Sure, it runs at Spec89f, and it's RISC, lightning fast, etc. It's a good thing, it is the first step. But the new line of Macs will incorporate the 68060 with a slot left open for the PowerPC chip. Now, as of today, Feb 24, 1993, IBM as anounced even more layoff's. This time, they cannot make up for these layoff's.Enough of the kiddie stuff. This is the real gang buster reason why the Mac is a superior machine. This is for serious PC user's, like the kind that can't switch to a Mac because they have custom written software or something but need the superior power of desktop publishing graphics, etc. There are software emulators can run PC stuff, but those usually can't get the job done, even with VGA. THIS IS THE SOLUTION:T H EO R A N G E P CC A R D ! ! !What is this magical card? It is a full-fledged IBM PC motherboard, adapted to work in the Mac Nubus slot. Currently, you can have a 486sx 66MHz, 16 MB's, RAM SVGA, etc, and a couple other goodies. For $1099!!!!! That's definentely the thing that beat's anything the PC can offer!Why won't they make a OrangePC for the PC that has a Mac board? If you don't already know, it's because of STRICT copyright laws that are heavly enforced. IBM obviously didn't copyright there BIOs well or something, because everyone and there grandmother can assemble & market a PC compatible. The last company, back in '84, that tried to make their own mac compat, got their butt's sued off. Back when Apple tried to make their first portable, a disaster, they struck a deal with Outbound to market portables. In January, 1993, Outbound went out of business, falling behind the NEW, sleek, Apple portables.Finally, the programming. Sure you might have to follow some ( ok, a lot ) of guidelines, the final product you get on the Mac excels what you get on an IBM. This is fact. I know a lot of backwards little men that use IBM's still think a mac is a dinky little toy that has a built in 9" screen & is Black & White. Not true...In closing, the IBM computers are sold because IBM stands for: "Inferior But Marketable"... Many PC user's have agreed with me and said this was true... You can get them cheap, but will get a cheap product compared to what you could have on a superior machine, such as the Macintosh.I WELCOME EVERYONE TO DISTRIBUTE THIS FILE, BUT DO NOT MODIFY IT! SEND ME COMMENTS AND YOUR VIEWS, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHY YOU THINK THE IBM PC OR COMPAT. IS SUPERIOR IN ANYWAY TO THE MAC! I DON'T WANT COMMENTS FROM AMIGA AND OTHER SMALL PARY COMPUTER's, AS THEY WILL NEVER BE WORTHWHILE. These views were expressed by Brian Verre. Following files might become avail. if I get a good reason to make them. ( such as e-mail debates ).END OF FILE #1... PCVSMAC.TXT MACVSIBM.TXT March 3,1993 _____________________ I've decided to reply to the afformentioned file as I continue to download in the background, then I'll upload this file, so please excuse the poor grammer! _____________________ Settled once and for all? Hmm, I've heard that one before... Windows & OS/2 worthless? NOPE! Never EVER heard that one before! Look, I currently work on two systems, a blazing fast 486 at work, and a blazing fast Quadra 950 at my school (I'm a designer.) And I can tell you its not quite that simple. Here, I'll make this simple and organize what I know from experience as well as others and publications I regularly read... _____________________ Apple Quadra (Motorola based) Built around a graphical op. (ripped off from XEROX back at PARC) gives it incredible graphics power "out of the box." Most graphic designers use them. Why? Because back when the Mac was introduced it was a real tool that designers could use to help them in their tasks. At the time this was exclusive--since then, they have become a standard tool because everyone has them, thus, all the design software is written for them first (larger market!) Also, designers as a whole enter computers as a necessity, not as an interest, and they want something simple that will do what they want and thats it--much like an appliance! Are easy to buy. (Apple owns most standards and is the only one to produce the computers, so there's not too many choices) Are easy to use (Apple controls the GUI, and has designed it for point- and-click manuverability only) Are good looking (Apple spent alot on industrial design to produce sharp looking, ergonomic computers) _____________________ PC's (Intel, AMD, Cyrix etc.. based) Are TOTALLY configurable and at a "lower level" for techo-freaks (the innovators!) Are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, cheaper (to a similarly matched Quadra) due to a MASSIVELY competing marketplace Are totally flexible in environment: DOS, UNIX, X-Window, DrDOS, OS/2, Novell (which means we can have different GUI's that are more suited for a task, and have different resolutions--Great for games, CAD, Virtual reality and all that other stuff Apple users dream about... Has superior networking power & Flexibility (although PC's takes alot of unjustified crap about not being networkable "out of the box" like what Apple passes off as networking) Have superior speed in customized environments WIIIIIDE assortment of motherboard manufacturers & motherboard features Most of the WORLD uses Intel based computers, which gives Intel more power which gives us better technology than Motorola. Ps--You won't see Motorola advertising their CPU's like Intel any time soon--can you guess why? Mail-order companies such as Dell and Gateway 2000 are superior in service, support etc... compared to Apple--and, you can choose! Hell! You can build! What a concept! Standards come about via a democratic system--ie. the users! Not Apple! (QuickTime?! Ack! Whoever designed that standard needs to take a big step back for a sec!) Basically, in fact, you can push a PC in any direction you want. Currently Multimedia is the buzzword, but how many people out there actually USE multimedia--and why? Well, Apple has a head start on this in terms of mass production as I mentioned above, which is fortunate for us since PC peripheral manufactureres can improve on what Apple tried to do before we're commited to something stupid! Ps. The neatest multimedia in action that I've EVER seen in actual mass use actually came from Big Blue at the '92 world expo in Sevilla Spain!--Note, I usually do NOT encourage IBM as a company.) Sure, DOS' filenames are stupid, I haven't met anyone who supports them!But they're there if you cling to DOS, which was created over a decade ago lest I remind you! Apple on the other hand, preferres to FORCE their paganistic blind followers "forward" by making a new "system" incompatible with the previous! Can you afford that?!?? Intel and Motorola seem to be at the heart of this battle though, and I, as well as most of the world would invest in Intel right now. Currently, Intel is deep in "parallel manufacturing", working on the p5 and the p6 at the same time (both will break records). I read in PC magazine about how by 1995 they predict speeds in the 250 Mhz range. (thats TWO-FIFTY folks!) Fortunately for us PC followers, we can expect our peripherals to be pushing forward at a similar pace, since its a free market out there! I find it amusing that the author to which I'm responding actually boasts about Apples tight grip on their technology! I also find it amazing how easily he dismisses Amiga and other third party systems (does this include Sun, Silicon Graphics etc?!) Oh, and did I mention the software industry?.... _____________________ Times up! Downloads over! Reply VIA Exec-PC please. Thanks for giving my editorial your time! Sincerely, Devout Cyberpunk:Chris Gielow Milwaukee, Wisconsin Please leave this file unmodified, and distribute with MACVSIBM.TXT, thanks! MCVSIBM2.TXT Omigod, the Sequel!!! --------------------- In this I'm going to settle a couple points. THE OBJECT OF THIS FILE IS NOT TO TELL PEOPLE TO DUMP THEIR PC'S AND BUY MACS. I have gotten a couple E-Mail response's, and I am satisfied. I was going to leave it where it was at, but I saw the file PCVSMAC.TXT in the file section and HAD to reply.I never said ( or meant to say ) that Windows & OS/2 are worthless. They may be inferior in a VARIETY of ways, but FAR from worthless!!! They are a major part of the backbone than folds up the PC!!!Secondly, Apple took the MENU's from XEROX'x STAR computer. They took nothing more. They designed a new approach to computing. Then the people at MicroSlop decided that: "Hey! Lets rip off Apple's GUI! We can make lotz of cash, and support the PC user's!". Take away MicroSlop and the PC is SEVERLY weakened.Anyone that is going to argue with me about speed and preformance BETTER have used a top of the line Apple Computer & A top of the line PC before yelling at me. I can take Chris Gielow seriously because he obviously has, or at least he sez. Sounds like he isn't too comfy with the Mac, and not entirely know- ledgable of it from his comments.Apple didn't FORCE anyone to upgrade to System 7. I know plenty of people that use new macs ( and old ) that continue to use the previous system. 97.5 % of the new applications can run under the old system as well as the new. Same goes for practically ANY other OS on ANY other computer.Plus, until last month, UPGRADES WERE FREE. The MicroSlop was the one that ALWAYS had cost money. Proof of that is the Apple copyright software on Exec- PC. Absolutely FREE. hahha. Then came the cutbacks. So NOW they have to charge.Chris Gielow said the best multimedia you ever saw was by Big Blue? Get out more Chris. Look for one of the computer animation/rendering videos. Most of that stuff is Mac. T2 was partly done on a Mac, as many things are. Have you sen Apple's multimedia/computer animation commercial? If you haven't look for it. I read the article about the 250MHz 386. Not bad at all. Motorola won't be far behind. Right now, they're ahead. As for an Intel being more advanced? hahahah, what a joke. So PC's are cheap, and can be sold in mass quantities. I guess they believe quantity is better than quality. As for Motorola not advertizing? Just you watch. They are starting to now, as they want to point out why the Intel is inferior. They are ahead, and are gonna take advantage of it, as they will in the future, because they will constantly BE AHEAD. I guess you've been studing Intel pretty well, but have dismissed Motorola. If you studied Motorola you would have realized why they have always BEEN ahead.As for Apple holding copy-right, they do, tightly. Who cares? There are MANY choices in what you want your setup to contain. As for networking 'out of the box', Apple is. What it 'passes off' as networking is configurable & pretty good for built in, unlike PC's. Who sez you cannot buy something external if you wish???As for QuickTime being 'Ack!'? What does a PC have to offer? An 8-bit .FLI with no sound in it? ( Stored in a seperate file, of course ). Mac user's dreaming of quality games, CAD, and virtual reality software? This agai points out your lack of knowledge in the area. Mac software in those fields can match and usually excels the PC ( and 'third- party' computers ).I don't easly dismiss those computers. But Amiga's are extrememly virus prone and ripped Apple off down to the Trash can. A MAc can outpreform an Amiga mostly due to the software aspects. The Amiga is a good computer, far ahead of the PC in the Multi-media field, but behind the Mac mostly because of software ( and developers ). As for Dell, Gateway and others being better? Don't think so. Same product, different box. Anyway, Apple outsold them last year, along with IBM.I'll write more if I find necessary. I don't want E-Mail, or more files. This subject is going nowhere, but I hope it has proved some insight. If anyone out there wants to be backward, let them. Just don't mail me and tell me about it. I'm not being backward, I accept PC's for what there worth. This should prove to be the end of the series. If you are going to distribute PCVSMAC.TXT and/or MACVSIBM.TXT, include this file, unmodified.PS- Thanks for warning us about 'bad grammar' because of a D/L in the back- ground, Chris. Just goes to show how worthless a PC is for multi-tasking. I wrote this file with a large D/L in the background, and didn't even have to pause for the computer to catch up. Just typed like normal. Open up a little. PCVSMAC2.TXT Are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH, cheaper (to a similarly matched Quadra) due to a MASSIVELY competing marketplace Closing remarks to "MCVSIBM2.TXT" February 5th, 1993 Sorry, but I can't let your last file (mentioned above) go without comment. In response to your remarks: "Take away "Microslop" and the PC is SEVERELY weakened" Hmmm, take away Apple, and what's a Quadra (or Mac?)??? Also, I disagree, take a look at high end modeling and rendering software from Alias and Intergraph etc... I mention this since I work primarily on graphics software and thats what I know--that kind of stuff was not made to work in the windows environment. Luckily you can run anything under windows you want. I'd also like to point out some features that Apple is trying to catch up with, like their advanced forms of OLE, portable environments, handwriting recognition etc... What do you use YOUR Mac for anyway? If its not graphics or word processing... Also, I'm very much aware that Apple didn't force users into Sys7--but couldn't they make it a little easier? I suppose it doesn't matter since Apple's not competing with anyone--therefore, they can do whatever they want! (This is NOT a compliment!) As for "getting out more often" I'm quite informed when it comes to multimedia--I know what both platforms are offering, and I suggest you read my first letter more carefully: Multimedia is all in the software, and what I said about the graphic design field I believe to be true. As for the article you read on the "250 Mhz 386" first of all, thats a FOUR- eight six not THREE! Second, there WAS no article, just a news brief (a sentance or two.) As for fringe technologies like VR, most of it spawns of PC's because of the versitality in hardware and programming! I'm not talking commercial stuff here! And T2 graphics? Macs were only a part of it! Right now the STANDARD in animation are workstations from Silicon Graphics (Go RISC!) As for Quick Time: I think the standard sucks, It takes up too much power and space to make any effect on myself. I just recently downloaded MS' "Video for Windows" player along with an AVI file--great! JUST like what I've seen in QuickTime...then I proceeded to delete both! But if you're curious: Quick Time does exist on the PC, as well as Video FW, as well as standard .FLI files. So... if you're into making training videos or bad "convention booth" multimedia shows, use it! But I'd use an PC controlled external device like a videodisc player for some good, fast, BIG analog video! As for Mail-order PC companies, if you check out the back cover of PC Magazine sometime (a Dell Ad) you'll notice that Apple Came third to users in overall satisfaction, reliability, Price, Technical support etc.. (After Dell and Compaq & occasionally even Big Blue!) And Apple outselling PC's? NEVER! Also, your comment that they're the "same product/different box" was faaar off. Check em' out sometime! Finally, as for my disclaimer of bad grammer, I said so because I was only downloading about 20 min. worth of files--I wrote the document before they finished. You'd be quite amazed at how you DON'T EVEN NOTICE a background transfer along with 6 more open applications on a unaccelerated 386sx 16Mhz... I'll be soon slapping a 486 motherboard in there to more than quintuple my home computing speed (and OH SO CHEAP--no labor or shipping costs either!) In summary, I find your uneducated arrogance not only insulting, but not worth the time to argue with. I enjoy Macintoshes, but I'd never buy one myself and I think these last three documents should speak for themselves. Signing off for good:C.Gielow, who no longer wants to be part of a pointless argument thats been burning for years, and will continue for years... (I hope this argument opened some eyes out there! I'm getting sick of it all!) MACBULL.TXT Grrr! Argh!I finally got to read macvsibm.txt and found that the author is proball an apple stock holder as well as a sales man for special products that cost as much as if not more than most pcs off the shelf. The single most thought provoking idea he holds up is the pwoer of the macs processor. This is a motorola chip which is exclusived to apple so that it cannot be obtained inexpensively the buss and data arcatechture are not compatable with the low cost and easier to use pcs and the exclusivity of product makes it user hostile in the event of failure costing often 3 to5 times the cost to repair of pcs if Apple is ever challenged for its unwieldly stucture by the japanese or koreans you will see them fall to the same fate as ibm which is laying off not because of poor product showing but because of market forces which have driven prices below profit margins for a company with as much research and developement as ibm used to have. Apple depends on its unwieldly repairability and obscure structre to stay clear of the japanese and european copiers but don't ever try to fix one your self or you will have to pay dearly both mentally and financially to have the factory refurb it. vm