rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (07/08/86)
In article <6851@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >> >... the first company to come out with 1280x800 (mono) graphics, >> >1 meg memory, 1 MIPS, Virtual memory, and non-proprietary >> >multi-tasking in a complete system for under $1000 will shake the >> >market so badly, that the rest will have to follow. >> >> The Commodore 900 had all this for about $3K 2 years ago. They cancelled. > >More significantly, the Atari ST comes close now, and is selling pretty >well. The screen is too small, there is no virtual memory, and none of >the software multi-tasks, but it's close and later ones will probably >be closer. >-- Actually the ST comes even closer. Multi-tasking is available through RTX or OS-9. It has, or can be expanded to one meg, or even more (up to 4 meg on-board). Have you noticed how fast the prices have been dropping on the '86 machines :-)? This is only the BEGINNING folks.
mwm@eris.UUCP (07/11/86)
In article <198@cci632.UUCP> rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard) writes: >In article <6851@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >>> >... the first company to come out with 1280x800 (mono) graphics, >>> >1 meg memory, 1 MIPS, Virtual memory, and non-proprietary >>> >multi-tasking in a complete system for under $1000 will shake the >>> >market so badly, that the rest will have to follow. >>> >>> The Commodore 900 had all this for about $3K 2 years ago. They cancelled. >> >>More significantly, the Atari ST comes close now, and is selling pretty >>well. The screen is too small, there is no virtual memory, and none of >>the software multi-tasks, but it's close and later ones will probably >>be closer. >>-- >Actually the ST comes even closer. Multi-tasking is available through >RTX or OS-9. It has, or can be expanded to one meg, or even more (up to >4 meg on-board). The Amiga comes equally close ($1295 with the monitor), multitasking, and expandability to 8.5Meg. Color graphics and fantastic sound are freebies. :-) Still want to see OS/9 on the box, though. >Have you noticed how fast the prices have been dropping on the '86 >machines :-)? > >This is only the BEGINNING folks. Yes. This is the BEGINNING of an EXPONENTIAL curve. Seems you can by twice the machine for the price in 2-year intervals. By 1995, you should be able to get a Cray on your desktop, for < $2K. I can't wait! <mike
MADSON@SRI-KL.arpa (07/11/86)
I agree that the ST provides great performance for the buck. However, the GEM user interface leaves a lot to be desired. A small example: upon exiting a file, a box appears with a STOP sign and words to the effect: "...If you wish to save your work, please Cancel now and do so.", followed by two 'buttons': "OK" and "CANCEL". The agreeable user clicks "OK" and returns to the 'desktop' without saving. Granted, this probably only has to happen once. Even so, such a weak inter- face limits the machine's usefulness for many users. The Amiga is yet another symptom of the hardware-driven mentality that says "the most clever or powerful design is guaranteed to sell"--it has yet to pay off for the Amiga. This notion that a 1 MIPS, 1K x 1K display (etc.) computer will take the world by storm by virtue of its design grows weaker each day (as the market niche for such ma- chines becomes less well-defined). Hackers will probably buy in, but it's the larger-market potential that gets the sales people excited. The only way we can keep from drowning in PC 8088/8008/4004/Selectric 'technology' is to show users directly what the machine's power does for them. Lousy code and user interfaces work against that. --carl madson P.S. -- I realize that, as usual, there's a lot more between Henry's words than meets this observer's eyes. Fire at will... (George) Disclaimer: I'm in no way connected with pro- or anti-ST factions, although I have a Mac and I bought my dad an ST. If he ends up trashing files, that's his problem. -------
mercury@ut-ngp.UUCP (07/13/86)
[If Bourne wrote another shell, would they call it the `Bourne Again' shell?] In article <954@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, mwm@eris.UUCP writes: > Yes. This is the BEGINNING of an EXPONENTIAL curve. Seems you can by > twice the machine for the price in 2-year intervals. By 1995, you > should be able to get a Cray on your desktop, for < $2K. > > I can't wait! > > <mike Excerpted from `Domestic and Overseas Report' by Frank D. Greco, *Programmer's Journal*, Vol. 4 #4, July-August issue. ...[beginquote] "CRAY-VING" FOR MORE POWER According to the CEO of Cray Research, Seymour Cray, the Cray 3 will be in prototypical form sometime in 1987 and will be commercially available in 1988. The macine will be outfitted with 8 Gigabytes of RAM (that is, one billion 64-bit words) and will feature 16 parallel processing units. And the main processing unit will be the size of today's IBM PC. ...[endquote] Something, I can't imagine what, tells me that they won't be selling it for less than $2K, but it's a step in the right direction. Larry -- Larry Baker Net/UUCP: mercury@ut-ngp.{ARPA, UUCP, UTEXAS.EDU} UT Austin ihnp4!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!mercury Computer Science Local: baker@walt.UTEXAS.EDU -- Larry Baker Net/UUCP: mercury@ut-ngp.{ARPA, UUCP, UTEXAS.EDU} UT Austin ihnp4!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!mercury Computer Science Local: baker@walt.UTEXAS.EDU
lbl@druhi.UUCP (07/14/86)
In article <2130@brl-smoke.ARPA>, MADSON@SRI-KL.arpa writes: > I agree that the ST provides great performance for the buck. However, the GEM > user interface leaves a lot to be desired. A small example: upon exiting a > file, a box appears with a STOP sign and words to the effect: "...If you wish > to save your work, please Cancel now and do so.", followed by two 'buttons': > "OK" and "CANCEL". The agreeable user clicks "OK" and returns to the 'desktop' > without saving. > Granted, this probably only has to happen once. Even so, such a weak inter- > face limits the machine's usefulness for many users. The Amiga is yet another other comments edited out > > --carl madson > Carl, This example is really a case of bad program design by the author of whatever program you (or you dad) were running. GEM will allow you to put whatever text that you (the programmer) wish to in the exit buttons. In this case the buttons should have been more unambiguous choices such as "EXIT" and "RETURN". Obviously, the explanatory text should be changed also. Please note that I don't think GEM is perfect - far from it! I just wanted to set the record straight as to who was at fault in the above example. Barry Locklear
robt@molihp.UUCP (07/15/86)
In article <2130@brl-smoke.ARPA> MADSON@SRI-KL.arpa (Carl Madson) writes: >I agree that the ST provides great performance for the buck. However, the GEM >user interface leaves a lot to be desired. A small example: upon exiting a >file, a box appears with a STOP sign and words to the effect: "...If you wish >to save your work, please Cancel now and do so.", followed by two 'buttons': >"OK" and "CANCEL". The agreeable user clicks "OK" and returns to the 'desktop' >without saving. Huh? I don't like this sort of thing any more than you do, but this is all the fault of the *application* programmer, not GEM. This can easily be done better with a different question and different button labels. Programmers can be brain-damaged in any environment, just like real programmers can write FORTRAN code in any language. # UUCP : ...!ubc_vision!molihp!robt Robert Thurlow # # My thoughts are my own, and are void where prohibited by law. # # "There was something fishy about the butler. I think he was a # # Pisces, probably working for scale." -Nick Danger, 3rd Eye #
rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (07/17/86)
In article <2130@brl-smoke.ARPA> MADSON@SRI-KL.arpa (Carl Madson) writes: >I agree that the ST provides great performance for the buck. However, the GEM >user interface leaves a lot to be desired. User interfaces are as "intangable" as keyboard preferences. The user is likely to "get used to anything" but will always want "improvements". >This notion >that a 1 MIPS, 1K x 1K display (etc.) computer will take the world by storm by >virtue of its design grows weaker each day (as the market niche for such ma- >chines becomes less well-defined). Hackers will probably buy in, but it's the >larger-market potential that gets the sales people excited. The only way we >can keep from drowning in PC 8088/8008/4004/Selectric 'technology' is to show >users directly what the machine's power does for them. Lousy code and user >interfaces work against that. The reason I gave those parameters was a little non-obvious. The 1Kx1K display was given because this gives a reasonably high resolution to an 8"x10" or 8 1/2" x 11" piece of paper. This is the "user interface" that most people see. For text this means a 80 character by 66 line display can fit in a portion of the screen. Several can fit on a "desktop". 1 MIPS because "papers" and images must be "moved", "rotated", and "located" in real time. Also, logical relations and associations need to be converted to "org charts". Even at 1 mips/user this can take 5 minutes for a 2000 association "organization". The "paper, pencil, and eraser" metaphor is especially apropriate. Not everyone uses a typewriter, but who uses pencil and paper?
brianu@inmet.UUCP (07/17/86)
> Excerpted from `Domestic and Overseas Report' by Frank D. Greco, > *Programmer's Journal*, Vol. 4 #4, July-August issue. > ...[beginquote] > "CRAY-VING" FOR MORE POWER > According to the CEO of Cray Research, Seymour Cray, the Cray 3 will > be in prototypical form sometime in 1987 and will be commercially > available in 1988. The macine will be outfitted with 8 Gigabytes of > RAM (that is, one billion 64-bit words) and will feature 16 parallel > processing units. And the main processing unit will be the size of > today's IBM PC. > ...[endquote] > Something, I can't imagine what, tells me that they won't be selling > it for less than $2K, but it's a step in the right direction. > Larry Baker Net/UUCP: mercury@ut-ngp.{ARPA, UUCP, UTEXAS.EDU} Is this really what they said? I ask because Seymour Cray is not the CEO of CRI, John Rollwagon is. Everything else jives with what I've heard though. But then the Cray 2 already has 2 Gigabytes of RAM and 4 parallel processing units in a C-shaped container the size of an average desk. ==================================================================== Gen.: And do you mean to say that you would deliberately rob me of these, the sole remaining props of my old age, and leave me to go through the remainder of life unfriended, unprotected, and alone? Pirate: Well, yes; that's the idea. Brian Utterback Intermetrics Inc. 733 Concord Ave. Cambridge MA. 02138. (617) 661-1840 UUCP: {cca!ima,ihnp4}!inmet!brianu Life: UCLA!PCS!Telos!Cray!I**2