::scr A PC user speaks

[David Cantrell]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2002 at 08:53:11AM -0800, jonah wrote:
> Forgive me for trolling here, but I think that all this carping about
> single mouse buttons and insistence that a mouse Must Have multiple
> buttons shows a disturbing lack of flexibility and
> adaptability. :) Seriously, though, what does it matter how many buttons
> the mouse has so long as the interface is well enough designed to allow
> you to do what you want? Sure, people might have to learn a new way to do
> things, but to someone who can learn to use complex Lunix
> (sic) command-line actions, learning to work a one-button mouse shouldn't
> be too hard. 

I haven't yet found OS X's emulation of multiple mouse buttons to be
consistent*.  Actually, I still can't get used to the way modifier keys
work in the Finder either.  Maybe I'm just being stupid, but I find it
a great deal easier to use a multi-button mouse on my Mac desktop than
the single button thing on my Mac laptop.  Multiple-button mice are
proven to work.

> ObAside:
> I often hear CLI fans espousing the "power and flexibility of the command
> line". Which is true to a certain extent - when I first learned to use a
> CLI I found it very liberating. But it has fuck all power and flexibility
> when you're trying to draw a pony (certain silly perl modules aside). :)

But I don't want to draw ponies.  Apple wanted MY opinions, so they got 'em.
Having a command line as well as all their pointy-clicky-drooly stuff is a
Good Thing, cos it means that they can service those who draw ponies both
ways.

> > 2. Old Mac users, many of whom seem to hate  OS X. Whether this is
> > reactionism 
> Reactionism. Heh, well, not really. I think one of the reasons blech
> dislikes OS X is that it's a "cut and shunt" OS in his opinion. The
> reliance on NeXT based stuff means that Unix/Linux users can't transfer
> their knowledge to the new OS. (Is that accurate Paul?) I didn't find
> that, but then I haven't really invested heavily in specialising in any
> particular flavour of Unix and so the basic, generic stuff that I'm
> comfortable with transfers pretty easily. Those of you with a deeper
> knowledge may differ.

The generic stuff does transfer well, apart from the use of Netinfo instead
of "proper" config files.  Aside from that, it's no more weird than Solaris,
or Irix or Linux or Unixware.

> > lying underneath like the nougat in a Double Decker bar (the most
> > underated of chocolate bars)
> Bullshit. That's Twix.

Twix is caramel and biscuit, and it is good.  Double Decker does indeed
have nougat, which is why it is the pseudo-chocolate bar of the devil.

> [0] Tangent - what's the collective noun for mac users? A giggle?

A Flash ;-)

* - maybe it is consistent, maybe it's not.  I don't care.  It doesn't
feel consistent, so it doesn't help me.

-- 
Grand Inquisitor Reverend David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

    Usenet is a co-operative venture, backed by nasty people.
    Follow the standards.
      -- Chris Rovers, in the Monastery