"Smitty Two" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"William Sommerwerck" wrote:

If you can't justify your position, then you're merely spewing.
Harlan Ellison agrees.

(Then I guess you were spewing when you said that PCs are
"superior in every respect" to Macs, because I'm pretty damn
sure that there isn't a shred of evidence anywhere in the world
to substantiate such a ridiculous claim.)

I said nothing of the sort. You read what you wanted to read.

I apologize for misquoting you. Your actual words we

"Windows-based computers are, overall, superior."

No problem. I misread, too.

I ought to clarify what I meant (if I haven't already). The thing that makes
the Macintosh so appealing -- that it is, to some degree, a closed system --
is what works against it if the particular piece of software or hardware you
need isn't available for it. As a programmer-writer, I need and use software
that just isn't available for the Mac.

Windows is an open system -- too much, perhaps. It has to handle a wider
range of software and hardware, and Microsoft doesn't do enough to enforce
standards that would minimize or eliminate conflicts or crashes.

When the day comes that you can buy a Macintosh that runs Mac and Windows
software simultaneously, and allows for data interchange between Mac and
Windows software, I'll buy one. This seems extremely difficult to do, but it
seems both necessary and inevitable.

By the way, Microsoft is supposedly working on the next version of Windows,
which will have a complete rewrite of the Windows "core", modularizing it
and removing most of the software dependencies that cause so many problems.
This will (supposedly) grossly reduce its size, improve its stability, and
make it easier to add features.