To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not really; the core of my argument is that the sentence I quoted from the beginning of the article and the summary sounded like the rest of the article would be an interesting read. It most definitely was not.
Clearly the author failed miserably to get his point across. Just a bunch of bugs and other undesirable behavior, everything odd, but nothing of interest as a "useful" feature whatsoever. I was expecting after reading that line for something interesting, but no--nothing but pointless crap. Crap that would make you stay far away from Apple if you were in the market for a new computer at that time period.
Did that computer have anything going for it? Anything at all? After reading that article I was left with a firm no. If the author was trying to raise awareness of the genius of the Macintosh's predecessor, he failed miserably at that too. I went in looking for actual features and interesting and unique ways that it did things... and all I left with knowledge of were bugs and poor system design.
Edited 2013-02-03 19:40 UTC





Member since:
2006-12-05
The machine's 30th anniversary is as good a time as any to take a look at a handful of both odd and useful features that truly made the Lisa something unique.
I didn't see a "handful of features" in the article that could be classified as either:
1. Not a ridiculous bug that any company would rightly be slammed to the ground for.
2. Not some kind of bizarre design decision that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
3. Actually a worthwhile feature for the user.
4. Or even a "feature" at all.
Really, the article leaves no wonder as to why the damn thing didn't take off in the first place... everything that the article claims makes the system "unique" is an undesirable trait.
Sorry, but the article is sorely lacking on what the summary suggests. It is a collection of basically nothing but "odd" bugs and design decisions. Useful features? Don't think so. "Features" at all? Not at all in my view. "Odd" is the only word they got even somewhat right.
Edited 2013-02-03 19:15 UTC