siegman@sierra.Stanford.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman) (07/24/89)
Several people have sent me queries about a statement I made in an earlier posting concerning educational computing, saying "Don't have anything to do with NeXT". This statement was too strong, or too brief, and I should perhaps explain it in more detail. When the NeXT machines first came out I (a) turned down an invitation to the big glitzy introduction in San Francisco's Davies Symphony Hall; (b) posted on number of messages to comp.sys.next (or whatever the original Next newsgroup was) with the title "Why the NeXT Machine Won't Be My Next Machine"; and (c) traded lots of memos with my own university's administration on the same general subject. A brief reprise of all this verbiage is as follows: 1. The NeXT machine was billed as "the machine" for university _educational_ computing. Well, I've thought about this quite a bit, and done a few minor things myself, and so far as educational uses of computers is concerned, I am an absolute believer in "one student, one machine" -- an environment in which the majority of educational computing services are delivered not by mainframes and terminals, and not by clusters of a few expensive high-power workstations, to which every student has to go like an acolyte, but through individual machines, preferably all compatible with each other, available in nearly every dorm room, on every faculty desk, etc., so faculty can hand out floppies in class, and students can turn on a machine whenever they want to, and students can write programs also, and so on. This means a compatible family, with low-end models for everyone, and higher-end models for those who need them -- e.g., in fact, e.VERY g., the Macintosh. 2. I'd say the maximum price for a machine that more or less every other student can afford to buy is, say, $1K to $2K, in today's dollars -- e.g., a Plus or SE at typical consortium prices. The NeXT machine, even at educational prices, is nominally $6K, and really $10K -- FAR out of the "every student" range. And, I don't see any real promise that this price will drop way down, to the degree required, anytime in the near future. And even if it does, there's no reason to believe that Macs won't go down in price, or up in capability, even faster. 3. And, I was offended by the hype. Sure, NeXT has some neat DSP and program development capabilities. But you can buy DSP boards for the Mac II that are essentially as good; and there are lots of neat programming tools for the Mac either out or coming out. And really the 1.0 version of the NeXT OS is STILL not out today -- and there's essentially zero outside software for NeXT, and somewhat dubious prospects for future development, compared to the riches available for the Mac. (And, no easy way to even distribute cheap software -- no floppy at all on the NeXT.) Summary: If you're setting up a university educational computing environment more or less from scratch, I think you should "go Mac", NOT "go NeXT" -- and if anyone involved in the selection process argues the reverse and says the word "multitasking", throw 'em off the selection committee that instant. 4. Meanwhile back home on the Farm, as a result of having been one of the earliest beneficiaries of Apple's consortium program, Stanford University has a magnificent Mac environment: Mac machines on innumerable faculty desks, probably in every other dormitory room, Mac clusters in the Student Union and the Library, and so on. And it happened, not because of central planning, but because people voted with their feet, and their personal buying dollars, in buying most of the Macs. (The central administration did of course set up the consortium plan, but several brands were available, and it was the Mac that took off. Some very valuable and much appreciated Apple donations helped also.) Yet despite the wide availability of Macs, we STILL do not have any regular classrooms equipped with Macs and either TV displays or LCD overhead projector displays so we can show Mac programs in class, as part of a lecture. And, our central computer group (AIR: Academic Information Resources) focuses much more on developing elaborate new "programming tools", rather than distributing most of the programming support money out to the working level, to write small programs for immediate use in classes, using the excellent Mac programming tools already commercially available. They're high-power computer jocks, with the usual NIH syndrome -- they want the latest jazziest tools, and they want to write their own, not use any grungy commercial stuff. (They're also pretty good on the empire-building index.) As a result, when NeXT was announced Stanford's AIR bought 34 -- count 'em, 34! -- NeXT machines: about a third of million dollars worth!, "just for evaluation" (that's what they said!). Had to be prepared for the future, they said. Had to support this major new development for the future. Not just I but others characterized this as grotesque. Four would have been "for evaluation"; and the rest of the money -- that's tuition money -- could have been spent putting LCD overhead-project display units for all the Macs we already have into classrooms, and hiring student programmers to develop course materials for animated-blackboard displays in classes, and other useful things like that, building on the superb Mac environment we already have. I believe the techie types in this organization mainly had to have the really latest hot machine for themselves -- who cares if nobody else on campus would be able to afford one anytime soon. To get out of this already overly long tirade, if anyone wants a good small hot Unix machine, and has the funding for it, why I suppose NeXT is obviously a strong contender -- along with Sun, and HP, and DEC, and etc., of course. But if you're talking widespread _educational_ uses of computers -- computers and software that will be used by, affordable by, operable by, and available to ordinary students and faculty members -- I think NeXT is not only irrelevant, but potentially damaging to your education health.
pmy@vivaldi.acc.Virginia.EDU (Pete Yadlowsky) (07/26/89)
In article <233@sierra.stanford.edu> siegman@sierra.UUCP (Anthony E. Siegman) writes: >Several people have sent me queries about a statement I made in an >earlier posting concerning educational computing, saying "Don't have >anything to do with NeXT". This statement was too strong, [...] "Strong" is not the word that came to mind, when I was handed a copy of this article. How about "reactionary"? >1. The NeXT machine was billed as "the machine" for university >_educational_ computing. >Well, I've thought about this quite a bit, and done a few minor things >myself, and so far as educational uses of computers is concerned, I am >an absolute believer in "one student, one machine" -- an environment >in which the majority of educational computing services are delivered >not by mainframes and terminals, and not by clusters of a few >expensive high-power workstations, to which every student has to go >like an acolyte, but through individual machines, preferably all >compatible with each other, available in nearly every dorm room, on >every faculty desk, etc., so faculty can hand out floppies in class, Floppies?! You're joking. How about ftp via university LAN? >and students can turn on a machine whenever they want to, and students >can write programs also, and so on. >This means a compatible family, with low-end models for everyone, and >higher-end models for those who need them -- e.g., in fact, e.VERY >g., the Macintosh. This is where I had to turn quickly from my Sun to avoid spilling bile on the keyboard. I'm forced at gunpoint to work on a MacII almost daily for two hours. A professor I do some programming for likes this machine because it's easier to use than the SEs that also reside in that particular room. I want you to know right now that I for one ***DETEST*** MacIntosh, even the "higher-end" models. I hate the operating system and the general architecture of the thing. Finder is a slug and MultiFinder is a joke. It's an insult to the intelligences of those who know what *real* multitasking is about. Having to go from my < $2000 Amiga at home to this beast is sheer hell, I can tell you. I'm sorry, environmental homogeneity is definitely not worth having to live with Macs. Please consider something else. >2. I'd say the maximum price for a machine that more or less every >other student can afford to buy is, say, $1K to $2K, in today's >dollars -- e.g., a Plus or SE at typical consortium prices. The NeXT >machine, even at educational prices, is nominally $6K, and really $10K >-- FAR out of the "every student" range. And, I don't see any real >promise that this price will drop way down, to the degree required, >anytime in the near future. And even if it does, there's no reason to >believe that Macs won't go down in price, or up in capability, even >faster. No reason to believe that they will, either. So the fact the every kid in every dorm can't afford a NeXT means that we should avoid them altogether, eh? Looking a wee bit into the future, don't you think it's possible that some sort of NeXT Jr. is likely to appear? By the way, you may be interested to know that the NeXT will be speaking (if it isn't already) AppleTalk as well as NFS. >3. And, I was offended by the hype. Sure, NeXT has some neat DSP and >program development capabilities. But you can buy DSP boards for the >Mac II that are essentially as good; Really? How much for a multitasking MacII w/8Meg and a DSP board? >and there are lots of neat >programming tools for the Mac either out or coming out. And really >the 1.0 version of the NeXT OS is STILL not out today -- and there's >essentially zero outside software for NeXT, and somewhat dubious >prospects for future development, compared to the riches available for >the Mac. The Mac was young once, too. Why didn't we just stay with C64/128s? >Summary: If you're setting up a university educational computing >environment more or less from scratch, I think you should "go Mac", >NOT "go NeXT" -- and if anyone involved in the selection process >argues the reverse and says the word "multitasking", throw 'em off >the selection committee that instant. Yeah, I was waiting to hear something like that. Nail the blasphemers to the wall!! If we ain't got it (multitasking), it ain't no good. >4. Meanwhile back home on the Farm, as a result of having been one of >the earliest beneficiaries of Apple's consortium program, Stanford >University has a magnificent Mac environment: Mac machines on >innumerable faculty desks, probably in every other dormitory room, Mac >clusters in the Student Union and the Library, and so on. And it >happened, not because of central planning, but because people voted >with their feet, and their personal buying dollars, in buying most of >the Macs. What were their alternatives? PCs and clones? Little wonder. >(The central administration did of course set up the consortium plan, >but several brands were available, and it was the Mac that took off. >Some very valuable and much appreciated Apple donations helped also.) Imagine that. >I believe the techie types in this organization mainly had to have the >really latest hot machine for themselves -- who cares if nobody else >on campus would be able to afford one anytime soon. So let's put the techies on ice and stick to our nice, warm fuzzy piles of obsolescence, because they're all we can afford. Look, I can understand the money issue, but don't expect that you can use it to drag forward-looking persons down into the muck of complacency. Rather, it's the techies who have always been dragging the complacent forward, often initially against their will. Techies are the reason you have your now-affordable Macs. >But if you're talking widespread _educational_ uses of computers -- >computers and software that will be used by, affordable by, operable >by, and available to ordinary students and faculty members -- I think >NeXT is not only irrelevant, but potentially damaging to your >education health. You seem to have a penchant for overly strong, if not silly, statements. "I survived NeXT camp." Peter M. Yadlowsky | "Pay no attention to that man Academic Computing Center | behind the curtain!" University of Virginia | pmy@Virginia.EDU |