jdehnert@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (James Dehnert) (06/12/91)
I heard that every employee at NeXT ahd a FAX of infoworlds article about the prototype 88110 board running at 50 to 60 MIPS waiting for them at work today, along with an "interesting" e-mail message. I would think that this means he rumors are true, but until NeXT says so, it's still just a rumor. On another note. I talked with a local NeXT person today, and although NeXT has not said anything one way or another about this, I now believe all of you slab owners will have no trouble upgrading your computers when the next round of upgrades hits. NeXT believs in the path to upgrades, and while it wont be as simple an operation as in the cube, it wont be that much harder. Never fear slab owners, you will be able to upgrade. -- ******************************************************************************** jdehnert@ucsd.edu "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel" -- William Gibson -- Neuromancer -- Eschew Obfuscation ********************************************************************************
cnh5730@calvin.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick) (06/12/91)
In article <20497@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> jdehnert@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (James Dehnert) writes:
I heard that [... rumors deleted ...]
On another note. I talked with a local NeXT person today, and
although NeXT has not said anything one way or another about this, I
now believe [... rumors deleted ...]
Since day one, it has been NeXT's official policy not to comment on
future products. Thus, it would seem that those who truly know are not
saying and those who are saying truly don't know.
--
The opinions expressed herein are mine and are in no way attributed
to any of the many people for whom I work. Who they are is irrelevant.ppham@gmuvax2.gmu.edu ( ) (06/13/91)
Reading the 88110 rumors I was getting more & more anctious. Since it's been less then a year since I got my 105Slab. If the price is going to be similar (as the rumors predict) then I'd go nuts for having an obsolete machine. :-). Dear NeXT: It is *VERY* IMPORTANT that we slab owners have a upgrade path. So to make sure NeXT gets the message, lets hear some seconds.
rtidd@kingpin.mitre.org (Randy Tidd) (06/13/91)
In article <1991Jun12.173849.7258@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> ppham@gmuvax2.gmu.edu ( ) writes: >Reading the 88110 rumors I was getting more & more anctious. Since it's been >less then a year since I got my 105Slab. Yes, it's been less than 2 months since I got mine. >Dear NeXT: It is *VERY* IMPORTANT that we slab owners have a upgrade path. >So to make sure NeXT gets the message, lets hear some seconds. Yes. I figured buying a NeXT Station 105 while I was still a student was a good get-my-foot-in-the-door trick, I hope I don't get hung out to dry when a machine with 3 times the performance comes out and I have no way to upgrade. One disturbing comment near the end of that InfoWorld article, something about the fact that there aren't many NeXT users making a radical hardware change less painful. I hope that doesn't mean they are going to abandon their current NeXT supporters (like me), no matter how few there are. Randy Tidd Future NeRD -- Randy Tidd rtidd@mwunix.mitre.org
smithw@hamblin.math.byu.edu (Dr. William V. Smith) (06/13/91)
Randy Tidd writes: >was a good get-my-foot-in-the-door trick, I hope I don't get hung out >to dry when a machine with 3 times the performance comes out and I >have no way to upgrade. My understanding is that there will be an upgrade path for *all* NeXTs including both slabs. Prices? Nothing is set now, but upgrade could be in the 900.00 <-> 1,500.00 range. Moto has cut them a good deal on some of the hardware. Steve made a good move on this. Now if he would just get his marketing act together. -Bill -- EMail: smithw@hamblin.math.byu.edu or uunet!hamblin.math.byu.edu!smithw SMail: Math Dept. -- 314 TMCB; BYU; Provo, UT 84602 (USA) NeXTmail: bill@mathnx.math.byu.edu Phone: +1 801 378 2061 FAX: +1 801 378 2800
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (06/13/91)
In article <SMITHW.91Jun12180716@hamblin.hamblin.math.byu.edu> smithw@hamblin.math.byu.edu (Dr. William V. Smith) writes:
My understanding is that there will be an upgrade path for *all* NeXTs
including both slabs. Prices? Nothing is set now, but upgrade
could be in the 900.00 <-> 1,500.00 range. Moto has cut them
a good deal on some of the hardware. Steve made a good move on
this. Now if he would just get his marketing act together.
Wouldn't you say that it's more of a software problem than anything
else? People can't buy the NeXT if it doesn't run the software they
need! CAD, accounting, DTP(where's Quark?),... Adobe Illustrator has
been years in the making!
Of course 8MB machines that swap like mad don't give people a great
impression either.
-Miketempest@ecst.csuchico.edu (Kenneth K.F. Lui) (06/13/91)
So, all you people who haven't returned your '030 board after installing your '040 upgrade, send them back to NeXT!! I'd like NeXT to be able to offer upgrade paths in the future and not have any second thoughts. Ken ______________________________________________________________________________ tempest@ecst.csuchico.edu, tempest@walleye.ecst.csuchico.edu,|Kenneth K.F. Lui| tempest@sutro.sfsu.edu, tempest@wet.UUCP |________________|
UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer) (06/13/91)
If you can buy one today, it is already obsolete.
leezack@magus.UUCP (Zacharias_Beckman) (06/13/91)
In article <CNH5730.91Jun12114156@calvin.tamu.edu> cnh5730@calvin.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick) writes: > >Since day one, it has been NeXT's official policy not to comment on >future products. Thus, it would seem that those who truly know are not >saying and those who are saying truly don't know. I might say that if you think Everyone at NeXT follows the official policy, well, there is a slight reality gap there. Employees talk -- to friends, and sometimes to the public... If a fax was sent around to every person at NeXT, you can darn well believe the cats out of the bag. The only trouble is in determining which cat is the correct one. -- Zacharias J. Beckman | To be "matter of fact" about the world is to Lower Code Dweller | blunder into fantasy -- and dull fantasy at that, Boss Logic Inc. | as the real world is strange and wonderful. zack@bosslogic.com | --- Lazarus Long, by R. A. Heinlen
madler@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Mark Adler) (06/14/91)
In article <204@magus.UUCP> zack@magus.UUCP (Zacharias_Beckman) writes: >sometimes to the public... If a fax was sent around to every person at NeXT, >you can darn well believe the cats out of the bag. The only trouble is in >determining which cat is the correct one. The fax may have just as well been to give all the NeXT employees a belly laugh. Mark Adler madler@tybalt.caltech.edu
scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) (06/14/91)
In article <1991Jun12.200656.10243@linus.mitre.org> rtidd@kingpin.mitre.org (Randy Tidd) writes:
Yes. I figured buying a NeXT Station 105 while I was still a student
was a good get-my-foot-in-the-door trick, I hope I don't get hung out
to dry when a machine with 3 times the performance comes out and I
have no way to upgrade.
:-). Seriously, though, there _will_ be a machine with 3x performance
(be it an 88000-base or 68040 running at 96.5Mhz), and those who
haven't kept up will be hung out to dry, in one way or another.
But, fortunately, your machine will _always_ work for what you bought
it for, if your expectations were reasonable. And I doubt NeXT will
be terribly incompatible for the next 2 years or so (beyond two
years, it's a complete and total crap-shoot - in _any_ segment of
the computer industry).
Later,
--
scott hess scott@gac.edu
Independent NeXT Developer Graduated GAC Undergrad!
<I still speak for nobody>
Note: I have moved home for a time. My email address will still be
valid. Any SnailMail should be redirected, along with phone calls.
At the least, my parents can tell you how to get hold of me, or
forward any mail . . .
Old: PO 829, GAC, St. Peter, MN 56082 (507) 933-8466
New: RR#4 Box 227 Pipestone, MN 56164 (507) 825-2788glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us (Glenn Reid) (06/14/91)
Mark Adler writes > In article <204@magus.UUCP> zack@magus.UUCP (Zacharias_Beckman) writes: > >sometimes to the public... If a fax was sent around to every person at NeXT, > >you can darn well believe the cats out of the bag. The only trouble is in > >determining which cat is the correct one. > > The fax may have just as well been to give all the NeXT employees > a belly laugh. Humph. Anybody that knows anything about NeXT knows that they don't send faxes to each other anyway, they send Email. -- Glenn Reid RightBrain Software glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us NeXT/PostScript developers ..{adobe,next}!heaven!glenn 415-326-2974 (NeXTfax 326-2977)
barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (06/15/91)
In article <SCOTT.91Jun14002211@mcs-server.gac.edu> scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) writes: >In article <1991Jun12.200656.10243@linus.mitre.org> rtidd@kingpin.mitre.org (Randy Tidd) writes: > Yes. I figured buying a NeXT Station 105 while I was still a student > was a good get-my-foot-in-the-door trick, I hope I don't get hung out > to dry when a machine with 3 times the performance comes out and I > have no way to upgrade. > >:-). Seriously, though, there _will_ be a machine with 3x performance >(be it an 88000-base or 68040 running at 96.5Mhz), and those who >haven't kept up will be hung out to dry, in one way or another. > Just be glad that NeXT keeps pushing the technology forward. We need a company like NeXT for that reason, and conversely, NeXT can only justify their existence by doing so. They're not big enough to rest on their laurels (or is that lawyers :-), like some unnamed companies :-) The one thing we don't want is for NeXT to become like Apple/IBM: bound to the first systems they ever introduced, and with backward compatability always their first priority. A much better paradigm is to always push the technology, but provide a good uprgrade path for users and developers. -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet) barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (NeXTMail)
rreid@DPW.COM (r l reid ) (06/15/91)
In article <SCOTT.91Jun14002211@mcs-server.gac.edu> scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) writes: >But, fortunately, your machine will _always_ work for what you bought >it for, if your expectations were reasonable. Indeed. I expect my '030 cube running 1.0a in 8 megs will continue to chug along just fine for a number of years to come. Sacrilege? Hmmph, I never expected to own a machine of this power in my life. Why keep throwing money at it? Ro who drives a Plymouth Horizon
dlw@Atherton.COM (David Williams) (06/15/91)
Before anyone gets too excited about being obsolete with their 040 boxes just remember we are dealing with Motorola who had ENORMOUS problems delivering the 040 in quantity in any sort of a TIMELY fashion. While I do hope that NeXT does come out with a screaming RISC version I think we'll be waiting for quite a while before it actually SHIPS. So I think you'll all be banging on 040 boxes for a while. I mean NeXTDimension just started shipping recently and how long ago was that announced? David <Cubist>
thomsen@spf.trw.com (Mark R. Thomsen) (06/15/91)
My impressions from this sort of anxiety two years ago and today ... 1) This is far too early for NeXT to be committing to a CPU path for a future generation. They have to be trying and experimenting with several alternatives. In the past I have (under non-disclo- sure) been told of something in the works and then a change. It is too early based on the way NeXT can and does work. 2) I committed us to 68030 cubes running V0.9 29 months ago based on knowing that a faster CPU (probably a 68040) would come, that a great 24-bit color system would come, and that NeXT is committed to a logical upgrade path that can keep users growing. I now have confidence that NeXT will not leave us behind - software, hardware, and use have all grown in a logical, reasonably priced, almost painless fashion. This confidence comes from experience - they backed up what they told me and they did what was right. If you have not experienced this with other vendors then you will be anxious, but I will bet that you will gain confidence with time too. It is why I am now a fan. 3) If you have concerns on the direction, present them to the nearest NeXT employee. You would be suprised at how much they listen and respond to their perceptions of our desires. Or at least I was. Mark R. Thomsen
cmac@next.com (Chris MacAskill) (06/16/91)
In article <CNH5730.91Jun12114156@calvin.tamu.edu> cnh5730@calvin.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick) writes: > In article <20497@sdcc6.ucsd.edu> jdehnert@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (James Dehnert) writes: > > Since day one, it has been NeXT's official policy not to comment on > future products. Thus, it would seem that those who truly know are not > saying and those who are saying truly don't know. > :-) Spoken by a wise soul Chris MacAskill cmac@next.com
dnanian@uw.com (Dave Nanian) (06/17/91)
In article <SCOTT.91Jun14002211@mcs-server.gac.edu> scott@mcs-server.gac.edu (Scott Hess) writes: > :-). Seriously, though, there _will_ be a machine with 3x performance > (be it an 88000-base or 68040 running at 96.5Mhz), and those who > haven't kept up will be hung out to dry, in one way or another. Perhaps I'm just being ignorant of the real issues here, but wouldn't it be possible to put an 88110 and a 68040 on the board, with the 88110 for "new" stuff and the 68040 for "backward compatibility"? That way, all the old software would just work on the new machine. I don't know much about Mach, but if it can multiprocess, perhaps it can do it with different chips, based on something in the executable header that says what the executable is compiled for. --Dave Nanian, UnderWare, Inc. (dnanian@uw.com, uunet!uw!dnanian, NeXT Mail Preferred)
osborn@cs.utexas.edu (John Howard Osborn) (06/18/91)
Concerning the possibility of NeXT shipping an 88110 based computer, I'd like to note something that Apollo did to help solve the problem of incompatible machines. Apollo had a 68xxx-based series and an 88xxx-based (modified, called PRISM) workstation. Obviously, these machines were not binary compatible. But, the operating system let you build compound executables. The resulting file had a 68xxx code segment, an 88xxx code segment, and a single data segment. As a result, your code grew by about 33% in size (roughly), but a single program would run on either machine. Now, suppose NeXT ships an 88xxx based machine along with NeXTstep 3.0. Using this technology, developers could ship a single executable that would run on either the old 68xxx machines or the newer machines. Thus, the transition would be much eased. - -John H. Osborn -osborn@cs.utexas.edu
gillham@andrews.edu (Andrew Gillham) (06/18/91)
In article <20692@cs.utexas.edu> osborn@cs.utexas.edu (John Howard Osborn) writes: >file had a 68xxx code segment, an 88xxx code segment, and a single data >segment. As a result, your code grew by about 33% in size (roughly), >but a single program would run on either machine. > >Now, suppose NeXT ships an 88xxx based machine along with NeXTstep 3.0. >Using this technology, developers could ship a single executable that >would run on either the old 68xxx machines or the newer machines. >Thus, the transition would be much eased. > >- >-John H. Osborn >-osborn@cs.utexas.edu As long as you could "strip" out the code segment that you didn't need, this would be the way to do it. (IMHO) It wouldn't be as space intensive as both binaries, and it wouldn't exclude one group of users. -Andrew -- ===================================================================== Andrew Gillham ****** Andrews University ****** (gillham@andrews.edu) I would've added a cool .signature, but I already mailed this letter.
sparkie@picard.cs.wisc.edu (Mark Horn) (06/19/91)
In article <1991Jun14.172316.10315@math.ucla.edu> barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) writes: >Just be glad that NeXT keeps pushing the technology forward. We >need a company like NeXT for that reason, and conversely, NeXT >can only justify their existence by doing so. They're not big enough >to rest on their laurels (or is that lawyers :-), like some >unnamed companies :-) > >The one thing we don't want is for NeXT to become like Apple/IBM: bound >to the first systems they ever introduced, and with backward compatability >always their first priority. A much better paradigm is to always push >the technology, but provide a good uprgrade path for users and developers. Guess what...I disagree. Now isn't that the first time you've ever seen someone disagree in USENET? ;-) Anyway, I don't think it's a "much better paradigm" to not have backward compatibility as a very high priority. I think it's backward compatibility that allows you to establish a significant user base. Sun basically started over when they introduced their Sparcs and it took a relatively long time before Sun's new lines were accepted by the masses not to mention how Sun totally alienated their 680x0 users. On the other hand, PeeCee clone and Macintoy users have enjoyed not having to purchase new software when they purchase a better machine. This has allowed them to not destroy any existing user bases when they introduce new hardware. Personally, as someone who spends a lot more time writing programs than buying them, I couldn't care less. Most of the software that I want and use I have access to the source - which means that I just have to re-compile for the new hardware. Fine by me - bring on the new stuff! However, all the end users out there (like all the math dept's that are STILL waiting for Mathematica 2.0 to come out) will not be happy that they have to get new software in order to use the new hardware. If they don't use the new hardware, they risk getting hung out to dry very quickly (e.g. Sun). I don't have any statistics, but I suspect that there are just at least as many end users out there as there are programmer types. My point (in one clear concise sentance): Not being backward compatible really hurts users of third party products (i.e. Mathematica, SoftPC) for which simply re-compiling is NOT an option. There is a possible reprieve, though - if NeXT would provide an 040 emulater that would automagically kick in whenever you tried to run an old program, that would certainly fix the problem enough for now. Of course, all of this is getting a bit too speculative for me. NeXT hasn't let out one peep as to whether or not there is anything other than '040's going to be coming off the production line. Just an opinion...and don't go thinking that I approve of the stagnation that Apple & IBM are forcing. One of my private fears is that we will be stuck with MS-DOS in the same way we're stuck with Fortran - FOREVER! However, I see lots of enconomical impetus behind trying to keep an established user base good and happy. Later, - sparkie -- sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu (Mark Horn) NeXT Campus Consultant @ U. of Wisconsin, Madison