sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) (09/20/90)
Has anyone seen (drool, drool) the new NeXT machine?
For $4995 list (Univ $3220) you get:
Hardware
8 MB RAM (expandable to 32MB), Moto 68040 chip (claimed 15 MIPS),
the DSP signal processor, thin & twisted-pair (that's new) Ethernet,
2.88 MB 3 1/2" floppy, 105 MB hard disk (ok, so I'd prefer a bigger
hard disk),SCSI II port, 2 8-pin mini-DIN ports, microphone and
two speakers built built-in to the 1120 x 832 pixel grey-scale display
(why didn't they go for 1280 x 1024 or 1024 x 768? I'm sure Henry knows
(Does Bo know Henry?))
... in a box which is 15 5/8" wide and 2 1/2" deep ...
Software
UN*X, NeXT mail (big deal) Digital Webster. Add Mathematica if you
are an educational instutition. If you buy before January 1, you also
get a free copy of Lotus Improv (yes, Improv), their answer to 1-2-3.
It says "NeXTstep is available for the asking with the NeXTstation."
I'm not sure if that means you can get disks for it (and try to find
room on the dinky 105MB disk) or if you can get it for $$$.
I didn't see the color machine, but it'll be for $8K....
This whole thing reminds me of how Jobs started the Macintosh, bringing out
a (pricey, slow) machine (128K Mac, NeXT '030 cube), letting people develop
software for it and releasing Real Machines (1 MB MacPlus, NeXTstation
with an '40).
I'd like to put this thing next to a SPARCstation SLC and an X-term for
kicks for benchmarks, but I suspect someone else will. henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) (09/21/90)
In article <0093CF4F.80076240@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU> sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) writes: > two speakers built built-in to the 1120 x 832 pixel grey-scale display > (why didn't they go for 1280 x 1024 or 1024 x 768? ... It's not uncommon to start with a requirement that says something like "roughly 1024x768, but do better if you can" and end up with some odd set of numbers like 1120x832. The cost-of-resolution curve is not linear: it has nearly-flat sections where you just keep jacking up the video clock rate, punctuated by sharp jumps where some nice part runs out of steam and you have to pay more for something faster. ("Cost" and "pay" here are in a very general sense, covering design impact as well as dollars.) For a guess, NeXT's basic design decisions landed them in a particular flat section, and it cost them almost nothing to boost resolution up to the foot of the next jump. -- TCP/IP: handling tomorrow's loads today| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology OSI: handling yesterday's loads someday| henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (09/24/90)
Do they still bundle WriteNow with the next machine?
hankd@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (Hank Dietz) (10/02/90)
In article <1990Sep20.175913.11599@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <0093CF4F.80076240@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU> sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney) writes: >> two speakers built built-in to the 1120 x 832 pixel grey-scale display >> (why didn't they go for 1280 x 1024 or 1024 x 768? ... > >It's not uncommon to start with a requirement that says something like >"roughly 1024x768, but do better if you can" and end up with some odd set >of numbers like 1120x832. The cost-of-resolution curve is not linear: it I don't think that's all. I suspect that they did it so that you could get a 1024 x 768 framed window... but that's just a wild guess.... -hankd
gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (10/04/90)
Knowing something about Steve Jobs, it probably has something do with displaying 2 WYSWYG representations of a sheet of paper, on the same screen at the same time. If someone knew the resolution (80dpi?) of the display, then we could confirm this. The original Mac 128K could display exactly 1/2 a sheet of paper (6.5" wide by 4.25" tall) at once.