>>Most people don't have experience with NT, they know of Win 3.1 or Win 95.
I don't think those offer much to those who like Mac.<<
My current home system is a hybrid dual boot between 3.1 and NT. I chose to
avoid the 1st generation headaches of 95's plug & play. By now things have
come together for PNP, but I'll wait until NT 5.0 to try it on.
>>The studies still suggest it is easier to be more productive with a
mac interface, .<<
Certainly for those who are already accustomed to it.
Although 3.1 wasn't as graphically streamlined as MAC, I still preferred it
over MAC in production environments. My preference can be summed up by
comparing the MAC boot up with the Windows: MAC shows me a smiling face
while the PC runs by the command lines it is executing. Those command lines
are telling me things and when there are problems I can review them and
react. When the MAC has acted up, I've been reduced to juggling extensions
in a trial & error routine. Ironicly, it is the very aspect that has won
over so many hearts to MAC that has always put me off. As a professional, I
feel I should take responsibility for my tools. Know them well. Know how to
fine tune them and be able to react when things go amiss. It always seemed
that MAC discouraged that kind of approach with their hand holding and
>>Right now Apple has the fastest single processor graphics
desktop machines on the planet (G3s)<<
Actually I think that kudos belongs to the Alpha chip (600 mHz). But
aspects of this hardware makes it uncompatable with current NT apps. Each
vendor would have to write a different version to support Alpha and only a
few have (Photoshop is one!). Those that did are asking a premium for the
task. And so like SGI hardware, Alpha solutions will remain a high end
Frank Ippolito [log in to unmask]
American Museum of Natural History
"Wherever you go..., there you are."