barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (05/11/91)
In article <PETRILLI.91May10014133@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu> petrilli@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli) writes: [about how unlikely it is to see NeXTStep on IBMs, due to Mach aversion] >The best bet is Next being nice enough to give NextStep to the FSF, >and let us run it on GNU (based on Mach3). Yes, this would be great; they could call it GnUStep. This would not hurt NeXT at all, because (a) it would give their interface much wider distribution, increasing software development (both by enlarging the market, and giving more developers access). (b) A basic GnUStep would not have all the great bundled NeXT user-level software (mail, Mathematica, Websters, Writenow,etc), nor the great NeXT hardware (sound capability, for e.g) so people would still have a motivation to buy NeXT computers. I really think NeXT should get on the ball and do this---it would only help. It should be clear now that IBM has no real intention to switch to a NeXTStep standard, so the idea that IBM would perform function (a) is dead. It happens to the best of them---remember, after 6 years in the biz, Adobe finally was forced to release their font specifications to avoid being crushed by functional equivalents pushed by powerful forces (MicroSoft, Apple). The same will be true for NeXTSTep---if they don't release it (GNU is the perfect channel) the whole world will end up running X or Windows 3.0 (shudder). It would be glorious if Steve Jobs, when announcing 3.0, could stand proudly and say that NeXTStep would now be the standard GUI for GNU. Further, If NeXT doesn't do this, some other more clear thinking company (maybe HP? DEC already did, with X) will realease their own system, which will probably be good enough to where noone would really care about NeXTStep after that. Remeber that competition for market share in hi tech markets is very unstable---whoever get the initial edge usually totally dominates. (Fortunately for us, X is just bad enough to where NeXTStep could beat it, if released soon). Finally, I have a selfish motive: I would like to write some GUI interface stuff on NeXTs, but I can't really do this at the moment, because the target audience (mostly Nuclear Fusion Engineers) use mainly X based workstations. If GnUStep were available, I could do it, and just say ``this runs under GnUStep, available at ftp site...''. Since the programs I develop are important (used to model $10 billion machines), the engineers would have enough motivation to grab GnUStep to use the GUI interface. As it stands though, we will have to slap an X interface on them. Does anyone at NeXT knwo whether NeXT is even considering releasing a minimal version of NeXTStep (including IB, of course) through GNU or some other channel? -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet)
petrilli@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Chris Petrilli) (05/11/91)
Barry Merriman writes: >The best bet is Next being nice enough to give NextStep to the FSF, >and let us run it on GNU (based on Mach3). Yes, this would be great; they could call it GnUStep. This would not hurt NeXT at all, because [...enumerates the exact reasons why this should and must be done...] It would be glorious if Steve Jobs, when announcing 3.0, could stand proudly and say that NeXTStep would now be the standard GUI for GNU. I'de like to see it more than anyone... it may or may not happen, but it is nice to dream about. Somehow RMS and SJ go together. Further, If NeXT doesn't do this, some other more clear thinking company (maybe HP? DEC already did, with X) will realease their own system, which will probably be good enough to where noone would really care about NeXTStep after that. Remeber that competition for market share in hi tech markets is very unstable---whoever get the initial edge usually totally dominates. (Fortunately for us, X is just bad enough to where NeXTStep could beat it, if released soon). I don't know about X being 'just bad enough' but it is inferior in most everyone's opinion. It would be nice to see X relagated to the 'bottom of the heap' as the replacement for the 'dumb terminal' with NeXTstep as teh ruling 'workstation' environment. MIT had more to do with X being release than DEC, as I recall. Finally, I have a selfish motive: I would like to write some GUI interface stuff on NeXTs, but I can't really do this at the moment, because the target audience (mostly Nuclear Fusion Engineers) use mainly X based workstations. If GnUStep were available, I could do it, and just say ``this runs under GnUStep, available at ftp site...''. Since the programs I develop are important (used to model $10 billion machines), the engineers would have enough motivation to grab GnUStep to use the GUI interface. As it stands though, we will have to slap an X interface on them. Me too... while this HP 9000/300 doesn't compete with the '040 machines (it is OK when compared to the '030), it would be nice to trash X11R4 and get NeXTstep up and running on this 20" color monitor. If NeXTstep were as freely available as X, I think it would become the dominant GUI, with X11R4 staying around because it's so entrenched. Let's face it there are hundereds if not thousands of X apps floating around. Does anyone at NeXT knwo whether NeXT is even considering releasing a minimal version of NeXTStep (including IB, of course) through GNU or some other channel? Like I originally said... the feeling I got is that YES, they were considering it, but they decided not to because of Display Postscript. I have been told that the author of Ghostscript has got mots of DPS running, so it shouldn't be too much harder to get it all running... then comes Objective-C (already given to the FSF) and Mach (available now, and when GNU and OSF/1 are available). That's a pretty wide base of systems. Everyone cross your fingers. Chris -- + Chris Petrilli | Internet: petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu + Insert silly disclaimer drivel here.