The following originated from an e-mail exchange between myself (Rich Poll at Christian Research Institute) and someone from a branch office of ours in Canada: >How familiar are you with the Windows environment & how does >such an environment stack up, in your unbiased opinion, >against that of the Mac? You have asked the million-dollar-jackpot question. Lots could be said. Bob Lyle (our main computer support person on staff) and I are the only Windows people in the research department. Bob knows DOS/Windows much better than I and has often set up systems for his personal friends. I don't know of anyone who is sharper on DOS or Windows than he is. I lean on him a lot for tweaking my system. However, Bob has recently dumped his 486 to buy a Mac -- he feels the Mac is that much more superior. Having previously used a Comodore and then DOS machine I was the first researcher here to buy and/or use a personal computer in the office for ministry; a Mac Plus in 1986. Since then the office went all DOS and has gone full circle to being almost all Mac today. At home I now have have a 486/66 clone and a Mac Centris 650, both with CD-ROM drives. I use the 486 to dial up DOS/Windows BBS sites, evaluate DOS/Windows software and develop the DOS versions of CRI's free software that we offer to the public.* Similarly, I use the Mac to do much the same thing in that environment. Both Bob and I feel blessed for service to know each platform as well as we do. Currently Bob and I are the only staff in the research department who also have a DOS machines (286 for me and 386 running Windows for Bob) at the office. The rest of the staff all use Macs. I hope to dump the 286 for a 486 in the near future. But you asked for my opinion regarding the comparison of Windows to the Mac OS. As I see it, there is no economical substitute for creative productivity. I am much more productive and creative with the Mac for a given investment of time than I am with DOS or Windows. Windows is at best a poor imitation of the Mac look. It does not have the Mac feel or the Mac's ease of use. But certainly it is easier than DOS. We all keep files. I have one titled "Mac vs. DOS" and in it are articles I have found related to the subject. Here are excerpts, in no particular order, from some of them: "Putting the Cart Before the Horse" -- gives reference to the oft-sited advice that "the process of choosing a computer has very little to do with the actual computer and very much to do with the software that runs on it. The software determines how easy it is to [use]. ...In real life, the choice usually comes down to DOS-Windows versus Macintosh. ...The Macintosh operating system, introduced by Apple in 1984, is better than the Microsoft Corporation's Windows 3.0, introduced in 1990." New York Times, Nov 26 '91, pB8. "Fox Software 'Gets Religion,' Becomes Mac Evangelist" -- a strong statement in the form of a profile on the creators of FoxBase, (having since been acquired by Microsoft in 1992). The article describes how Fox's software development team came to dump their DOS environment and do the majority of their work on the Mac. MacWeek, Jun 14 '88, p52. "The Best of Both Worlds: A Conversation with Paul Somerson" -- this DOS software author, former Executive Editor of PC Magazine, and author of the book, DOS Power Tools, became an early editor-in-chief of MacUser magazine. (Translation: He knoweth where with he speaketh.) Somerson says he became "interested in the Mac because of my frustration with DOS. ...It was obvious that IBM was starting to borrow a lot of ideas form the Mac, so I said to myself, 'If the Mac is successful I want to go to the source and see what this is all about.' ...The whole operating system on the Mac is designed for ease of use. But the real beauty of it has to do with standards. On the PC side . . . there's no way you can test drive your software or have a fast learning curve from one program to another. On the Mac it's totally different." Computer Newslink (Waldenbooks), circa 1991?, p17. "Macs Still Beat PCs, but System 7.1 Does Little to Widen Gap" -- compares Windows 3.1 to the latest Mac system upgrade. The title speaks for itself. Orange County Register, Nov 30 '92, pD28. "New Apples Provide Confusing Windfall for PC Shoppers" - - complaining that there are now too many models to choose from for the average first-time PC buyer, the author makes the following remark. The "Centris 610's chip runs at only 20 megahertz, my test model seemed to move more quickly through common tasks than my IBM-compatible 486 machine running Windows at twice the processor speed. Yet the Centris 610 with four megabytes of memory and an 80-megabyte hard disk costs only about [great price] without monitor." Wall Street Journal, Apr 8 '93, pB1. "Penn Fraser Jillette" -- a computer guru interview with Jillette, a PC/Computing magazine columnist who says, "Windows just feels slow and sloppy. And we all know deep in our hearts that Windows is just a bad Mac." New York Times, Sep 5 '93, p8F. "Getting Started" -- speaking to people with school-aged children about how Fall is often the time of year parents shop for a home system and software. The author says, "Give strong consideration to an Apple Macintosh. No matter what the DOS- Windows users say, the Macintosh is still the easiest system to set up, learn, use and upgrade." Orange County Register, Aug 23 '93, p23 (Business section). "It Does More" -- Stewart Alsop, main editor of InfoWorld magazine, says "The only machine that can run DOS, Windows, UNIX, and Macintosh software simultaneously is the Macintosh." InforWorld, Apr 2 '90, n.p. "Platform Choose" -- a head-to-head comparison between Windows and Macintosh by one of the most widely respected computer columnists in the business, John Dvorak, who says, "The Mac still seems like the better machine overall, with clear advantages." MacUser, Dec '93, p300. "Study: Macs Cheaper In Long Run" -- based on the figures given in a survey of large companies using both Macs and IBM PC clones the five year cost of owning a comparable Mac is about 16% less than that of a Windows-based machine and almost 23% less than DOS systems in light of service and support. "The Mac's biggest savings, according to the report, come from lower training costs." MacWeek, Oct 18 '93, p1. "It's More Economical" -- "Training, startup (installation), and general support cost... These are the areas where the Mac simply runs its DOS/Windows competitors into the ground." Computer Shopper, Aug '91, n.p. "Faithful Windows Users Are Doing the Unthinkable" -- another computer columnist who knows both worlds very well, Don Crabb, says "I am getting a surprising number of letters from [Windows users] asking about making the switch to the Mac. The reasons the Windows faithful have cited for switching include... 'I could learn the Mac in hours, whereas Windows still trips me up' 'The Mac doesn't expect me to be a chiphead' 'I handle heavy-duty photos, need to upgrade more and find that Windows presents [hardware upgrade] compatibility problems'" MacWeek, Nov 1 '93, p41. "Apple's Entropy Case" -- John Dvorak writes, "I finally upgraded my Mac system to a Quadra 950, a LaserWriter Pro 630, and a fancy color scanner. I connected the Quadra to a 20-inch Radius monitor I've been itching to use. Unlike in the PC world, where such a system change would mean a lost weekend, this whole upgrade took about an hour. Amazing. What's more amazing is that the new system worked with no hitches. A PC system takes about the same amount of time to physically set up, but you lose a weekend while you try to get it to work, because you have to deal with such things as nonstandard BIOS chips, SCSI that doesn't work, and IRQ conflicts." MacUser, Jan '94, p282. "Its More Complete" -- "Most Macs come with built-in hardware features that are costly, complicated extras on IBM clones, including networking capability, sound and 256-color video." Wall Street Journal, Aug 6 '92, n.p. "Why a PC Is Better than a Mac... and Vice Versa" -- the main PC argument was, again, economic. David Coursey, editor of PC Letter, argued the Mac side and included two significant concerns that are not mentioned above. The first was with regard to the handicap of DOS file names which limit you to only eight characters and a three-character suffix that is often designated for you. The Mac gives you about four times the freedom (which typically describes the overall DOS/Mac comparison). Regarding the second item, the Mac's "approach makes applications easy to install -- and uninstall. Uninstalling a Windows application is a trick worthy of David Copperfield." That is an understatement in my opinion. While installation can be easier with Windows than with DOS, if there is a glitch in the process you are in for some serious sweat. I agree that uninstalling with Windows is the real pain. Newsweek, Nov 22 '93, pN28 (special ad section). Something that has not been mentioned would fit in here. I recently through away an article on the computer virus which covered both the DOS and Mac environments. After it was too late to retrieve it I got to thinking about something the article reported. Apparently, while there are multiple hundreds of viral threats in the PC world, the Mac virus count is a total of less than 20 and a good number of them are not in wide circulation. Someone donated a nice 386 system to CRI recently. When Bob tried to use it he found that it was rendered useless because of a virus. While this seems to say something about why the hardware was donated, I think it says more to those who are currently considering a first-time purchase. "Pentium Power Curbed Without Optimized Apps" -- yeah, what about the Pentium? Well, "Software optimization for Intel Corp.'s Pentium is off to a slow start, calling into question both the much-touted advantages of the chip's architecture and exactly how users can expect to benefit from the chip. The Pentium's superscalar and advanced pipelined architecture allows for faster, more efficient processing. But optimized software is needed to push the processor to significantly higher levels of performance than the 386 and 486. ...Currently, most major vendors are not shipping Pentium-optimized mass-market software. For example, Microsoft Corp. said at fall Comdex that it had no intention of supporting Pentium..." So, the ole' Intel gang seems to be in a forced sleep mode whilst the Power PC chip from Motorola motors its way toward the lead. Info World, Jan 24 '94, p1. "Windows Installations Are About As Fun As An IRS Audit" -- Editor-in-chiref, Stewart Alsop laments, "In the process of installing a bunch of Windows programs from both floppy and CD-ROM drives in a short period of time, I saw the range of install methods. I have to conclude that developers don't spend much time thinking about their customer's experience using the software. ...Its no wonder that people think Windows software isn't that good! ...I hope I never again have to install Windows software in a short period of time. It made me think that perhaps the PC industry is creating millions of unhappy or annoyed customers, who will eventually get their revenge." Let's hope so! Info World, Jan 24 '94, p90. --------------- End of document, "Mac vs. DOS/Windows, 2.1" Release 2.1, January 28, 1994 R. Poll, CRI --------------- * -- "CRI's free software," for more information just contact us and request the free item DC-670 for details on what this is and how to order: Christian Research Institute Post Office Box 500-TC San Juan Capistrano, CA 92693 (714) 855-9926 End of file.