jafischer@spurge.waterloo.edu (Jonathan A. Fischer) (10/30/88)
In article <471@wucs1.wustl.edu> conrad@wucs1.wustl.edu (H. Conrad Cunningham) writes: > ...He maintained that the NeXT computer will be a failure because >it not revolutionary enough. Its only advantage is a short-term >hardware capability/pricing advantage over the other available >UNIX-based workstations. He sees the NeXT as trying to impose a >visual, object-oriented overlay ("a Smalltalk-like environment") onto a >text-oriented UNIX base. These he contended are incompatible >notions--they mix like "oil and water." The UNIX base insures that >the visual and sound-oriented capabilities can't be used in any truly >revolutionary way. > > Thoughts anyone? Oh brother. Acme corp. comes out with a new, fast, cheap automobile and people complain, "I don't know, it's not revolutionary enough... I mean, it's still got 4 wheels. And folks are too accustomed to standard transmissions to use this automatic thingy." People keep claiming that the cube isn't revolutionary enough. Let me just summarise what I think is quite revolutionary enough for me, thanks: {256M removable disk, Mach, speed, DSP, hardware design} Etc. etc. Oh yes: and *price*. Sure, it's expensive, but I dunno, I consider this class of computer more valuable and useful than a car. That's just me. As for the installed base of 'textually-oriented' Unix users -- uh huh. Right. Show me the Unix hack who would refuse a graphics workstation if offered one. And frankly, I'm interested in this NeXTStep (and, to be fair, the plethora of other graphic interfaces that are being developed for Unix). I think they offer nice possibilities. Nobody's forcing these profs who have spent $XX,XXX on their Macs to buy cubes. -- -Jonathan Fischer Mr. Walkman
tli@sargas.usc.edu (Tony Li) (10/30/88)
In article <471@wucs1.wustl.edu> conrad@wucs1.wustl.edu (H. Conrad Cunningham) writes:
He maintained that the NeXT computer will be a failure because
it not revolutionary enough. Its only advantage is a short-term
hardware capability/pricing advantage over the other available
UNIX-based workstations. He sees the NeXT as trying to impose a
visual, object-oriented overlay ("a Smalltalk-like environment") onto a
text-oriented UNIX base. These he contended are incompatible
notions--they mix like "oil and water." The UNIX base insures that
the visual and sound-oriented capabilities can't be used in any truly
revolutionary way.
I recall that Sun Microsystems failed for exactly these same reasons.
;-)
Tony Li - USC University Computing Services - Dain Bramaged.
Uucp: oberon!tli
Bitnet: tli@kylara, tli@ramoth
Internet: tli@sargas.usc.edu