reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) (01/08/88)
I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Steve Jobs NeXT will be
utilizing NeWS or some variant of NeWS in their forthcoming workstation
products. Anyone have any comments on this and any other hardware platforms
that are jumping on the NeWS bandwagon? Or is it X or nothing?
--
George W. Leach Paradyne Corporation
{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie Mail stop LF-207
Phone: (813) 530-2376 P.O. Box 2826
Largo, FL 34649-2826siegel@hc.DSPO.GOV (Josh Siegel) (01/09/88)
In article <1970@pdn.UUCP> reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) writes: > > I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Steve Jobs NeXT will be >utilizing NeWS or some variant of NeWS in their forthcoming workstation >products. Anyone have any comments on this and any other hardware platforms >that are jumping on the NeWS bandwagon? Or is it X or nothing? > > >-- >George W. Leach Paradyne Corporation >{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie Mail stop LF-207 >Phone: (813) 530-2376 P.O. Box 2826 > Largo, FL 34649-2826 As far as I know, Apollo, Silicon Graphics, and Raster Tech are just a few of the people who are jumping on the NeWS band wagon. Also, Encore, Allient, and Celerity are some of the companies that will be supporting the client side at least. We have been a beta for NeWS 1.1 and have ported the client library to all these machines as well as to VMS. -- Josh Siegel (siegel@hc.dspo.gov) "laughing at you is like drop kicking a wounded humming bird"
hansen@mips.UUCP (Craig Hansen) (01/09/88)
In article <1970@pdn.UUCP>, reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) writes: > I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Steve Jobs NeXT will be > utilizing NeWS or some variant of NeWS in their forthcoming workstation > products. Anyone have any comments on this and any other hardware platforms > that are jumping on the NeWS bandwagon? Or is it X or nothing? You can get NeWS on MIPS hardware: Whitechapel Workstations, in the U.K., is producing a 10+-MIPS MIPS-R2000-based workstation that runs UMIPS-BSD with both X and NeWS. I have heard no current word of NeWS-only products, including from Sun! -- Craig Hansen Manager, Architecture Development MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. ....{ames,decwrl,prls}!mips!hansen or hansen@mips.com
greid@adobe.UUCP (01/09/88)
> I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Steve Jobs NeXT will be >utilizing NeWS or some variant of NeWS in their forthcoming workstation >products. Anyone have any comments on this and any other hardware platforms >that are jumping on the NeWS bandwagon? Or is it X or nothing? NeXT has announced that they will use the Display PostScript system from Adobe Systems Incorporated. This is not NeWS, it is PostScript. Here is an excerpt from the press release, dated September 9, 1987: "Adobe Systems Incorporated and NeXT, Inc. have announced the joint development of a high-performance interactive version of POSTSCRIPT software technology for use on workstation displays. Steven P. Jobs, Chairman and President of NeXT, Inc. made the announcement today during a speech at the Seybold Desktop Publishing Conference. The display version of the POSTSCRIPT software has been under development for 18 months by engineers at both NeXT and Adobe and is called 'Display POSTSCRIPT' software. "Display POSTSCRIPT is the first full implementation of the POSTSCRIPT language with the significant performance enhancements and extensions necessary to support high-performance interactive displays. Display POSTSCRIPT software includes full support for outline fonts, arbitrary line-widths, rotation, and color. ... "Display POSTSCRIPT software is independent of windowing systems and will be demonstrated by Adobe in the summer of 1988." --------- Glenn Reid Adobe Systems Incorporated PostScript Software Support
msc@ramoth.SGI.COM (Mark Callow) (01/09/88)
In article <1256@mips.UUCP>, hansen@mips.UUCP (Craig Hansen) writes: > You can get NeWS on MIPS hardware: Whitechapel Workstations, in the U.K., > is producing a 10+-MIPS MIPS-R2000-based workstation that runs UMIPS-BSD with > both X and NeWS. I have heard no current word of NeWS-only products, including > from Sun! > > -- > Craig Hansen > Manager, Architecture Development > MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. You can also get NeWS on MIPS hardware from Silicon Graphics. The next software release for the Iris 4-D family includes a NeWS-based window system to replace mex. The new Silicon Graphics release includes a version of X11 that runs alongside NeWS with the NeWS window manager being in control. Whitechapel offers a choice of window system in the price of their product, which is called the Hitech 10. The choices are NeWS or X. Both products have good fast ports of NeWS. They are both based on NeWS R1.0 because the timing for R1.1 wasn't quite right. -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@sgi.sgi.com, ...{ames,decwrl,sun}!sgi!msc "There is much virtue in a window. It is to a human being as a frame is to a painting, as a proscenium to a play. It strongly defines its content."
roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) (01/10/88)
In article <8801082123.AA11634@ondine.LOCAL> greid@adobe.UUCP writes: > NeXT has announced that they will use the Display PostScript system from > Adobe Systems Incorporated. This is not NeWS, it is PostScript. Arrrggghhh! Just what we need. Yet Another Standard. Can somebody please take the people from Adobe, Sun, and NeXT, put them in a room, and not let them out until they agree to all do the same thing. It's 33's vs. 45's all over again. Or is that 8-tracks vs. cassettes? Beta vs. VHS? RCA vs. Philips (video disks)? Kahn vs. Motorolla (AM stereo)? Sys5 vs. 4.N? -- Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
guy@gorodish.Sun.COM (Guy Harris) (01/10/88)
> "Display POSTSCRIPT software is independent of windowing systems and > will be demonstrated by Adobe in the summer of 1988." So what window system will NeXT be running Display PostScript atop? (And yes, from what I've heard, I'll agree that Display PostScript is not NeWS; NeWS currently implements what could probably be called a subset of PostScript with extensions - the extensions permit PostScript code to manage input as well as render images on the screen. I don't know whether Display PostScript handles input as well as output, but I suspect it doesn't. At some point, I presume we intend to finish implementing those parts of PostScript not already implemented in NeWS, as well, making the PostScript implemented by NeWS a proper superset of what is described in the Red Book. I don't work in the NeWS group, so for all I know this may already have been done. If there are cases where the NeWS interpreter does not properly implement something as per the Red Book, as opposed to not implementing it at all yet, that's probably a bug.) Guy Harris {ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy guy@sun.com
hans@sics.se (Hans Eriksson) (01/12/88)
Isn't there anyone who does a NeWS port for the Mac's? I have heard about
one company but has forgotten their name. Anyone else who knows?
/hans
--
Hans Eriksson
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Box 1263, S-163 13 SPANGA, Sweden
Tel: +46 8 750 79 70 Ttx: 812 61 54 SICS S Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
UUCP: hans@sics.UUCP or {seismo,mcvax}!enea!sics!hans EAN: hans@sics.sunetmday@cgl.ucsf.edu (Mark Day) (01/16/88)
In article <8801082123.AA11634@ondine.LOCAL> greid@adobe.UUCP writes: > >"Display POSTSCRIPT software is independent of windowing systems and >will be demonstrated by Adobe in the summer of 1988." Actually, There is a demo of Display Postscript going on as I am typing. In the Adobe both at MacWorld Expo, Display Postscript is running on a Mac II, Sun 3/50, an IBM RT and a couple other workstations that escape my mind. The Adobe representative went to great lengths to explain to me that NeWS programs may not run on Display POSTSCRIPT because NeWS doesn't completely follow the PostScript standard. *SIGH* it is bad enough to have to write programs for a variety of windowing (or display) systems. But to have multiple standards for PostScript display systems is ridiculous. ---------- Mark Day UUCP: ..ucbvax!ucsfcgl!mday ARPA: mday@cgl.ucsf.edu BITNET: mday@ucsfcgl.BITNET
mday@cgl.ucsf.edu (Mark Day) (01/16/88)
According to the Jan. 11 edition of Macintosh Today, EXP, a division of Wedge Inc. of Campbridge Mass., is developing NeWS for the Mac II. ---------- Mark Day UUCP: ..ucbvax!ucsfcgl!mday ARPA: mday@cgl.ucsf.edu BITNET: mday@ucsfcgl.BITNET
pablo@polygen.uucp (Pablo Halpern) (01/16/88)
In article <1676@sics.se> hans@sics.UUCP (Hans Eriksson) writes: > >Isn't there anyone who does a NeWS port for the Mac's? I have heard about >one company but has forgotten their name. Anyone else who knows? > >/hans > >-- >Hans Eriksson >Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Box 1263, S-163 13 SPANGA, Sweden >Tel: +46 8 750 79 70 Ttx: 812 61 54 SICS S Fax: +46 8 751 72 30 >UUCP: hans@sics.UUCP or {seismo,mcvax}!enea!sics!hans EAN: hans@sics.sunet In article <1676@sics.se> hans@sics.UUCP (Hans Eriksson) writes: > >Isn't there anyone who does a NeWS port for the Mac's? I have heard about >one company but has forgotten their name. Anyone else who knows? > eXP Inc, from Cambridge, Mass WAS doing a NeWS (server) port for the Mac. Unfortunately, they went bankrupt. I don't know what the disposition of the existing code will be, but I'll bet it will just die. Too bad! As to the larger question of NeWS on non-Sun hardware: I just returned from an X-windows conference at MIT. An engineer from Sun gave a talk on how Sun is merging the NeWS and X servers. As an aside, she mentioned that Sun and ATT are putting the merged product into the code that you get with a Unix source license. Unless I'm mistaken, that means that most Unix workstations will eventually support both NeWS and X. I've got to hand it to Sun (and, grudgingly, to ATT), they may actually win the battle to unify Unix and, although I don't think they'll beat X, they might not get beaten by X, either. After all, "if you can't beat them, merge them!" Words to hack by. Pablo Halpern Polygen Corp.
velu@agent99.UUCP (Velu Sinha) (01/20/88)
> >Date: Mon, 18 Jan 88 00:21:28 EST >To: NeWS-makers@brillig.umd.edu >Subject: Re: NeWS on non-Sun hardware? >From: (Pablo Halpern) > > ... > >In article <1676@sics.se> hans@sics.UUCP (Hans Eriksson) writes: >> >>Isn't there anyone who does a NeWS port for the Mac's? I have heard about >>one company but has forgotten their name. Anyone else who knows? >> > >eXP Inc, from Cambridge, Mass WAS doing a NeWS (server) port for the Mac. >Unfortunately, they went bankrupt. I don't know what the disposition >of the existing code will be, but I'll bet it will just die. Too bad! > > ... > >Pablo Halpern >Polygen Corp. > > I'd like to clarify that status of eXP, Wedge, and Papaya (the code name of our Mac based NeWS server)... eXP has NOT gone bankrupt. eXP is now a subsidiary of Wedge Computer, and is in the process of preparing the Macintosh NeWS server for market. Wedge Computer / eXP are in the process of moving offices, and thus it has been difficult for people to get a hold of us over the past few weeks. We should be fully settled by the end of January, and at that point the new address and phone number will be posted. A pre-Beta copy of NeWS is available from Wedge presently. The pre-beta package consists of six disks and some very terse instructions. We have not yet set a firm date for beta and product release as we are awaiting schedules from Sun regarding their NeWS 1.1 source release. It has been our intent to not finalize the 1.0 rev of NeWS for the Macintosh until the Sun 1.1 stuff can be incorporated. For more information, please contact John Fearnside at Wedge: (617) 868-5454 ... you are likely to get an answering service for the next week, but please bear with us. John should be back to you within 24 hours. Thank you. Velu Sinha Wedge Computer
andrew%mcvax@isdg.cs.hull.ac.UK (Andrew Stewart) (01/20/88)
>The Adobe representative went to great lengths to explain to me that NeWS >programs may not run on Display POSTSCRIPT because NeWS doesn't completely >follow the PostScript standard. I would recommend sticking with NeWS for the moment - Adobe's licencing policies are fairly expensive, and it's only a matter of time before someone manages to build a font model that is as good as Adobe's. I doubt whether Adobe will ever release the source to display PostScript, which gives NeWS an immediate edge as far as I'm concerned - it's one thing waiting for Adobe to port PostScript to a new marking engine, but display technology is evolving too rapidly to wait for one company. I agree, it's very irritating to have Adobe sticking their oar in in such an unproductive/unhelpful manner. (A minor flame - my apologies.) Andrew Stewart ---- Andrew Stewart, Interactive Systems Design Group, University of Hull, Hull, UK ARPA: andrew%hu-isd.uucp@ukc.ac.uk OR andrew@isdg.cs.hull.ac.uk
randy@ncifcrf.ncifcrf.gov (The Computer Grue) (01/22/88)
In article <10637@cgl.ucsf.EDU> mday@socrates.ucsf.edu.UUCP (Mark Day) writes: > The Adobe representative went to great lengths to explain to me that > NeWS programs may not run on Display POSTSCRIPT because NeWS doesn't > completely follow the PostScript standard. > ---------- > Mark Day > UUCP: ..ucbvax!ucsfcgl!mday > ARPA: mday@cgl.ucsf.edu > BITNET: mday@ucsfcgl.BITNET It is my understanding (I would appreciate the correction if I am wrong) that Sun strongly intends to bring NeWS up to being a full superset of postscript (I think it's one of their first priorities). This leaves the Adobe rep. sounding a little foolish. -- Randy Smith -- Randy Smith @ NCI Supercomputer Facility c/o PRI, Inc. Phone: (301) 698-5660 PO Box B, Bldng. 430 Uucp: ...!uunet!ncifcrf.gov!randy Frederick, MD 21701 Arpa: randy@ncifcrf.gov
msc@ramoth.SGI.COM (Mark Callow) (01/27/88)
In article <250@ncifcrf.ncifcrf.gov>, randy@ncifcrf.ncifcrf.gov (The Computer Grue) writes: > In article <10637@cgl.ucsf.EDU> mday@socrates.ucsf.edu.UUCP (Mark Day) writes: > > > The Adobe representative went to great lengths to explain to me that > > NeWS programs may not run on Display POSTSCRIPT because NeWS doesn't > > completely follow the PostScript standard. > > It is my understanding (I would appreciate the correction if I am > wrong) that Sun strongly intends to bring NeWS up to being a full > superset of postscript (I think it's one of their first priorities). > This leaves the Adobe rep. sounding a little foolish. > > -- Randy Smith The Adobe rep is right but his reason is wrong. NeWS programs will typically be full fledged applications using the input and canvas extensions of NeWS to handle interaction with the user. DisplayPostScript is output only and doesn't even have any similar extensions. However a PostScript described page will display equally well under DisplayPostScript or using psview under NeWS. Sun does follow the PostScript standard (as of NeWS release 1.1). -- From the TARDIS of Mark Callow msc@sgi.sgi.com, ...{ames,decwrl,sun}!sgi!msc "There is much virtue in a window. It is to a human being as a frame is to a painting, as a proscenium to a play. It strongly defines its content."
dawson@apollo.uucp (Keith Dawson) (02/02/88)
In a recent article siegel@hc.dspo.gov (Josh Siegel) writes: > In article <1970@pdn.UUCP> reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) writes: >> I seem to remember hearing somewhere that Steve Jobs NeXT will be >> utilizing NeWS or some variant of NeWS in their forthcoming workstation >> products. Anyone have any comments on this and any other hardware >> platforms that are jumping on the NeWS bandwagon? Or is it X or nothing? > As far as I know, Apollo, Silicon Graphics, and Raster Tech are just a few > of the people who are jumping on the NeWS band wagon. Also, > Encore, Allient, and Celerity are some of the companies that > will be supporting the client side at least. Apollo currently has no plans to support the NeWS product. Apollo's window strategy is based on the X Window System. Apollo's Open Dialogue UIMS, along with other recent developments such as Adobe's Display PostScript product, address the issues of user interface development and PostScript capabilities under X in a manner we feel to be superior to NeWS. Another advantage is that X is a public-domain window system, making it accessable to the entire industry. Most important of all it the fact that the marketplace has chosen X as the industry standard window system. Ross Chapman, Apollo Computer !decvax!apollo!chapman_r
benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) (02/03/88)
In article <3a06a194.c32@apollo.uucp>, dawson@apollo.uucp (Keith Dawson) writes: > Apollo currently has no plans to support the NeWS product. Apollo's window > strategy is based on the X Window System. > > Apollo's Open Dialogue UIMS, along with other recent developments such as I use Domain Dialogue and it is a decent product but most people I talk to (myself included) prefer a decent user interface library (such as the one found in SunView environment). > Adobe's Display PostScript product, address the issues of user interface > development and PostScript capabilities under X in a manner we feel to be > superior to NeWS. Another advantage is that X is a public-domain window > system, making it accessable to the entire industry. > > Most important of all it the fact that the marketplace has chosen X as the > industry standard window system. That's is highly debatable...and is being debated in newsgroups on the net comp.windows.misc & comp.misc. Again some have indicated that if it is an industry standard it may may be of short duration. > Ross Chapman, Apollo Computer > !decvax!apollo!chapman_r *FLAME ON* Its hard for me too take all this to seriously...how many years have we we heard that a decent version of Unix would be forthcoming to the Apollo any day soon (i'm still waiting). Its nice to see you people at Apollo suddenly discovering standards... Your history somehow speaks differently : while Sun chose CGI (a standard you see on PC and other machines) as their primitives libraries you people chose your creation GPR with ungodly function call names. while Sun chose Ethernet you people chose a proprietary domain ring (oh yes - Apollo has suddenly discovered Ethernet too - tho' it has all sorts of flaws - tune in on comp.sys.apollo sometime) while Sun chose Unix you people had already rejected that for your own creation - Aegis. (Ever see what happens to Aegis and Unix live together - any attempt at keeping file permissions straight dies. You learn to live in an environment where people can't do somethings in Unix and pop an Aegis shell and do it in that shell (and vice-versa). oh yes..when you finally found Unix...people wondered if your implementation was an advertisement for Aegis. Permissions are only the tip of the iceberg... *FLAME OFF* Now you know why i recently bought a Sun. :) It certainly wasn't out of ignorance. By the way, on my Sun I will be able to have three windowing systems at once ... NeWS and X and SunView ...at least till SunView II appears (it will apparently sit on NeWS/X). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The opinions expressed are my own and are certainly not those of the Boeing Company. They reflect my reflections, tribulations, notions, etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ganek@apollo.uucp (Dan Ganek) (02/05/88)
I probably shouldn't do this -- but every once in awhile I get a little upset at the Apollo bashing. benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel @ Boeing Aerospace Corp., Seattle WA) writes: > *FLAME ON* > Its hard for me too take all this to seriously...how many years have we > we heard that a decent version of Unix would be forthcoming > to the Apollo any day soon (i'm still waiting). > > Its nice to see you people at Apollo suddenly discovering standards... > Your history somehow speaks differently : > while Sun chose CGI (a standard you see on PC and other machines) > as their primitives libraries you people chose your creation GPR with > ungodly function call names. > > while Sun chose Ethernet you people chose a proprietary domain ring > (oh yes - Apollo has suddenly discovered Ethernet too - tho' it has > all sorts of flaws - tune in on comp.sys.apollo sometime) > > while Sun chose Unix you people had already rejected that for your > own creation - Aegis. (Ever see what happens to Aegis and Unix live > together - any attempt at keeping file permissions straight dies. > You learn to live in an environment where people can't do somethings > in Unix and pop an Aegis shell and do it in that shell (and vice-versa). > > oh yes..when you finally found Unix...people wondered if your > implementation was an advertisement for Aegis. > Permissions are only the tip of the iceberg... > *FLAME OFF* **FLAME OFF** (for now) I'm am a physicists by training and as such believe in the principle of causality, i.e the future can't affect the past. Some facts (or approximations thereof): 1) Apollo was founded in Feb, 1980 2) Apollo shipped its first workstation and window system in March, 1981. 3) Neither CGI, Sun, nor the PC market existed in 1980. 4) Ethernet was not a (de facto) standard in 1980. 5) UNIX was barely out of the university in 1980 and had little in the way of modern OS facilities. (still doesn't) Apollo chose the BEST TECHNOLOGIES OF THE TIME (1980), improved many of them (like UNIX). Nobody is perfect. Apollo is the ONLY major worksation company left from its era. (What happened to all those UNIX based workstation companies of 1980??) Johnny-come-lately's (like SUN) will of course take advantage of newer technologies and mistakes of predecessors. Apollo did - there's nothing wrong with that. I certainly don't complain about SUN learning from our mistakes. **FLAME ON** ANYONE CAN BE A MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK! **FLAME OFF** So, please give credit were credit is due and check your chronology! Standards are a very tricking business. It's a big gamble because standards represent the 'status quo' which is basicaly incompatible with 'state-of-the-art'. A high-tech company has to constantly make a descisions about standards: 1) go with a standard and hope that something better DOESN'T become a standard 2) go with the new and bet that IT will become the standard. Apollo has done well in this arena - but not perfectly. We created and dominated the technical workstation market - we misjudged some things - we learn from our mistakes. We have and will modify our products and architectures to meet the demands of the future. Right now SUN APPEARS to be doing some things right - maybe they are and maybe they aren't - only time will tell. Oops -- this is sounding too much like an excuse. I'll stop now. /dan ganek
benoni@ssc-vax.UUCP (Charles L Ditzel) (02/05/88)
In article <3a15b3ba.c82a@apollo.uucp>, ganek@apollo.uucp (Dan Ganek) writes: > > I probably shouldn't do this -- but every once in awhile I get a little > upset at the Apollo bashing. It had very little to do with Apollo bashing. Actually you are making the very same case I made. (You have 60 seconds to figure out what that case was ?..tick tick...) > Some facts (or approximations thereof): > 1) Apollo was founded in Feb, 1980 > 2) Apollo shipped its first workstation and window system in March, 1981. > 3) Neither CGI, Sun, nor the PC market existed in 1980. > 4) Ethernet was not a (de facto) standard in 1980. (that case was...) You are making a good case that your machines have evolved little since 1980 and I agree. The difference between then and now is you currently offer a kludgy dysfunctional form of Unix emulation and flawed tcp/ip ethernet connectivity. (9.7 is even worse than 9.6 with respect to tcp/ip). > 5) UNIX was barely out of the university in 1980 and had > little in the way of modern OS facilities. (still doesn't) Unix existed and was being licensed by AT&T at a reduced single- user cost (the year of the user license markdown was '79). I couldn't help noticing the Adus announcement that Aegis development had stopped despite its "modern OS facilities" and that Apollo was concentrating on Unix etc ... > Apollo chose the BEST TECHNOLOGIES OF THE TIME (1980), improved > many of them (like UNIX). matter of opinion. (like your 'acl' command which if handled wrong can destroy you hard disk?? The net toll on that was 2...though I suspect it is much higher. :) That one was in version 9.5 which you released in mid-1987! ) From my view Unix has rolled on past Aegis. Its a dead issue. > 1) go with a standard and hope that something better DOESN'T > become a standard If someone comes out with a better standard then it makes some sense to offer that standard...Note for example, unlike Apollo, Sun offers NeWS *and* X. > 2) go with the new and bet that IT will become the standard. How *could* Aegis, domain ring technology, GPR, etc become a standard. These things were all proprietary technology from Apollo. Notice that Sun is licensing NeWS, SunOS, SPARC etc. Let's face it Apollo was dragged kicking and screaming (by the marketplace) into at least coining the phrase "open systems." But enough of this. Back to NeWS.