Re: Sig vs. Xy4

[Robert Holmgren holmgren@xxxxxxxx]

** Reply to note from "Carl L. Distefano"  Fri, 29 Nov 1996 15:05:31 EST

> In terms of features, Xy4 stands head & shoulders over III+.

Absolutely.

> As much as I loved III+, I would never go back to it.

My sentiments exactly. The only thing in this thread with which I differ -- stated by Steve
Crutchfield maybe? -- was that Sig was dreadfully buggy and essentially unusable. It was
slow, for sure. But apart from that, in terms of the interface it was identical with Xy4,
and no more buggy than any first generation XyQuest product (remember v3.00, which wasn't
really smooth until v3.15B). I think they changed the argument order in *one* VAriable
when they introduced Xy4; other than that, nada. Once I got a grip on Sig, I liked it a lot,
and there was zero transition from Sig==>Xy4DOS. Certainly they seem to have streamlined the
underlying code in Xy4, but functionally there is NO difference Sig<==>Xy4.

-----------
Robert Holmgren
holmgren@xxxxxxxx
-----------