After Harmon questioned on the list why anyone would "want" to use Windows, I
noted privately that, for folks who need to use high-end apps that can exist
only in a graphical environment, the choice is Windows or a Mac. The 80x86
gui that Corel, Quark, and other high-end graphics developers write for is
Windows. Harmon answered via the xylist:
: Actually, Annie, the high-end graphics people
: wouldn't go near a windoz machine. They invariably
: use an Indy or Iris from Silicon Graphics, or a Sun
: or HP workstation--or at the least, a very, very,
: beefed-up Mac.
I had assumed that it was obvious my use of the term "high-end" was in the
context of microcomputers. Sorry if that wasn't clear.
: A crummy 16bit windoz system doesn't
: have the muscle to do real graphics--those apps are
: for the sandbox league desktop publishing crowd.
A debate based on insults ...
: Admittedly, OS/2 is handicapped by a lack--thus far
: --of native 32bit apps which utilize it's power
: and the 32bit hardware, but this situation is
: changing--Corel says it will have a native OS/2
: version out this year. When they do, I can
: finally rid my machine of that cursed code.
: Actually, when the PowerPC hits the market
: later this year, the whole scene will change
: quite rapidly. I'll be able to run those high-end
: Mac graphic programs under OS/2, and any developer
: like Corel who doesn't port their software over will
: join the CP/M developers. And that, of course, means
: a total re-writing of all windoz applications,
: whereas the OS/2 apps just have to be recompiled.
: This means, of course, that the "vast market base"
: of windoz apps will just hit the trash bin.
... and speculation regarding PPC or Warp vaporware does not engage my
interest. If you want to debate someone else, there are venues on the 'net
more appropriate than the xylist. --Annie
========================= annie fisher | nyc | okAnnie@aol.com