CompuServe Messages

Reza, My problem is not with Intel. I can squeeze my Intel machines the same way I can squeeze the PowerMac. But at what price? I doesn't mean CPU and peripheral prices but time cost. How many times I have seen messages in this and other boards about hardware conflicts? How many problem with Windows and memory managers (or any other thing that doesn't have Microsoft in the label). People say things like: I have been all the night or the weekend or a week tracking down conflicts in my system. I think that everyone here, included me, jumped in the intel bandwagon because it was cheap and it could be "easily" adapted to our necesities. This however, had and have its price. IMHO, we have been so close minded to other solutions that we have ignore them in favor of a false sense of "continuity" and, of course, for the price. I have had this position for years until now. Now I see my error. It is the turn for Intel and Microsoft to make powerful graphics oriented computers (and not only for having nice windows and pointers, which is nothing but a pretty face for plain mind business people). Or for IBM and software makers to make OS/2 a true graphics oriented platform (which I prefer). It seems, however, that the idea of graphics on a PC is video conferencing, charting programs and pencomputing based crosswords. I can send by e-mail you the list of features of the new QuickDraw GX engine and you will see clearly what graphics oriented computing means. That's exactly what I want for my Intel boxes. ana /krazy images