caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero) (10/18/88)
In article <157@gloom.UUCP> cory@gloom.UUCP (Cory Kempf) writes: >In article <15478@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, 128a-3aj@e260-3b.berkeley.edu (Jonathan Dubman) writes: >> There's no comp.sys.next yet, so this goes here. >I don't suppose that you get the alt net? they have alt.next... Not all of us get it-- we get a lot of alt groups (alt.rhode-island???) but not alt.next... Most of this traffic is going to comp.misc, so I'm sending followup there. >> 6. Mac software. Let's be realistic; I don't care how great the user- >> interface is, the Mac user-interface is darned good and there's tons of >> software for it. >> The software is good. I am sure the machine COULD run Mac software. >> If an Atari ST can run Mac software (I actually saw it!) then this can. Well, about that Atari trick: It works pretty well, even coming out about the same speed as a Mac SE. The only problem: You have to have a set of Macintosh 128K ROMs. Legit copies are actually not that hard to find (not PROMS, genuine from Apple ROMS, are available mail-order if you look around enough). I'd think an emulation could be managed at a speed well above that of the SE, since the NeXT has a fair amount of coprocessor support the Mac lacks, and the extra muscle CPU... One trick the Atari emulation mamaged that the NeXT would have some trouble with: Can the optical drive read and write Mac floppies? ;-) >Ok, let us be realistic... porting from one brand of unix to another is >fairly simple. Unix ports of existing applications shouldn't be too hard, for the most part... except for one little detail: NeXT's decision to not use X windows. I don't know how having NeXT's own windowing system to cope with will slow down porting anything with an interesting interface... >> And, finally, the big question: >> >> 8. Who do they REALLY intend to sell this machine to? Come on- Steve Jobs >> does not set his sights low. And to be honest the higher education market >> just doesn't strike me as that big with the current bureaucracy. Well, Jobs isn't exactly part of the current bureaucracy, much of the time... although I can't imagine this machine not being in fierce demand about a year from now for the publishing market-- figure in a year, they'll have both desktop publishing applications and color monitors ready, and I think sufficient market demand will cause Steve to reconsider his "University only" policy. -Antonio Romero romero@confidence.princeton.edu
bob@allosaur.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) (10/18/88)
(Note that followups are directed to comp.sys.next) In article <4021@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> caromero@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (C. Antonio Romero) writes: >In article <157@gloom.UUCP> cory@gloom.UUCP (Cory Kempf) writes: >>In article <15478@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, 128a-3aj@e260-3b.berkeley.edu (Jonathan Dubman) writes: >>> There's no comp.sys.next yet, so this goes here. >>I don't suppose that you get the alt net? they have alt.next... > >Not all of us get it-- we get a lot of alt groups (alt.rhode-island???) >but not alt.next... Most of this traffic is going to comp.misc, so I'm >sending followup there. OK, now that there's a comp.sys.next I'll point followups that-a-way! >Unix ports of existing applications shouldn't be too hard, for the >most part... If you mean ports of existing UNIX applications, then it's a piece of cake because Mach is 4.3BSD at the system-call level. >...except for one little detail: NeXT's decision to not use X >windows. I don't know how having NeXT's own windowing system to cope >with will slow down porting anything with an interesting interface... The Application Builder looks more like the Mac Prototyper than HyperTalk, though the Hyper stuff is there underneath, too. It looks like a lovely development environment, and folks who have fought the X Toolkit will drool. Also, why not write an X11 protocol interpreter in PostScript like Sun did for X10 in NeWS? >>> 8. Who do they REALLY intend to sell this machine to? Come on- >>> Steve Jobs does not set his sights low. And to be honest the >>> higher education market just doesn't strike me as that big with >>> the current bureaucracy. > >Well, Jobs isn't exactly part of the current bureaucracy, much of the >time... although I can't imagine this machine not being in fierce >demand about a year from now for the publishing market-- figure in a >year, they'll have both desktop publishing applications and color >monitors ready, and I think sufficient market demand will cause Steve >to reconsider his "University only" policy. The education market is hardly setting low sights for someone wanting to see if he can make an interesting machine. Nobody pushes machines harder, in a wider variety of ways. My friend in the Dance department has been pumping me about it for months (a dry hole until a week ago :-), similarly from Econ and Music and... Conventional workstation technology is appropriate for the Engineering College and the folks they graduate, for the jobs they do. This may be the workstation "for the rest of them." I'd suspect that NeXT would love to tackle other markets, once their technology has had a little while to shake down in a very demanding, more (dare I say it?) appreciative environment. This cube was designed for a specific niche market, education, and looks lovely for lots of disciplines inside academia where workstations haven't gone before. After a shakedown/experiene/momentum-gaining phase, they may be able to ramp up their manufacturing capacity to be able to handle the commercial markets as well. And then, maybe the home market will be ready for them. -=- Zippy sez, --Bob I don't believe there really IS a GAS SHORTAGE.. I think it's all just a BIG HOAX on the part of the plastic sign salesmen-- .. to sell more numbers!!
MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) (10/20/88)
Speaking of NeXT manufacturing capacity, just what is the state/details of
those hardware production facilities?
- MJB -