jsaxon@cs.tamu.edu (James B Saxon) (09/08/90)
That's right folks, it's no longer a rumor. If you liked using
Allegro Common Lisp and even PCL on the NeXT, you`d better stay with
system 1.0(a) because you're not going to get to see Allegro Common
Lisp in any bundle in the near future... Furthermore NeXT has no
contracts with Franz as it now stands for system 2.0 at all. To put
it simply, it's not economic for Franz to bend over backwards to work
with NeXT. If NeXT were to make the deal more comfortable though...
If you want Lisp on the NeXT, you'd better start complaining to NeXT
because the ball's in their court. I've been told that Max Henry may
be able to help out. He works at NeXT.
Tallye Ho!
--
-- \/ -- /----------------------------------\ James Bennett Saxon
| O| | O| / "I ought to join the club and beat \ Visualization Laboratory
-- -- / you over the head with it." G. Marx / Texas A&M University
\__/ <-------------------------------------/ jsaxon@cssun.tamu.eduagm@cs.brown.edu (Axel Merk) (09/08/90)
help! I NEED LISP!!! Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Axel Merk "One needs a certain amount of blindness -- -- agm@cs.brown.edu to see perfection" - Christopher Nuzum -- -- phone/fax (401)272 2262 Brown University Box 53 Providence RI 02912 -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) (09/09/90)
What? No more Lisp? They can't be serious!!! What does it mean to raise the lowest common denominator, if it is lowered afterwards?? I relied on having LISP on this machine, it was one of the reasons to buy a NeXT. No Common Lisp, No common denominator! Lisp is a very powerful tool and I need it. I actually hoped that NeXT's 2.0 would include the new version of Franz Allegro Common Lisp, and the debugging tools they call Composer! After all, the reason why Lisp is not used that much right now is that it was uninstalled and it's existence on the NeXT was not very well documented. I'd rather hope that NeXT changes it's mind and includes Common Lisp and works to integrate it better into the existing environement. Now the really important question: Will the CL of rel. 1.0 be compatible with rel 2.0? Will it be compatible with the new AppKit? Should my Lisp no longer work and should it not be possible to easily and cheaply upgrade to the new version, I will definitely feel cheated. Ronald ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." Bernhard Shaw | rca@cs.brown.edu or antony@browncog.bitnet
agm@cs.brown.edu (Axel Merk) (09/09/90)
In article <49392@brunix.UUCP> agm@cs.brown.edu (Axel Merk) writes: >help! I NEED LISP!!! > Sorry, I wasn't clear enough: If NeXT give's up its special edge (Lisp, Optical Disk, Mathematica, Sybase, DSP), my NeXT will be for sale and a sparc-station will serve my needs. I'm awaiting offers. Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Axel Merk "One needs a certain amount of blindness -- -- agm@cs.brown.edu to see perfection" - Christopher Nuzum -- -- phone/fax (401)272 2262 Brown University Box 53 Providence RI 02912 -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) (09/09/90)
I think it's too bad that Allegro CL isn't, apparently, going to be bundled with the system (as with many rumours, I'll believe it when I hear someone from NeXT confirm it officially). Allegro CL is an excellent product, but at least, we assume, Franz will continue supporting it. However, if you're going to have to pay money for a Lisp system, you might want to look at Chez Scheme instead (Scheme is *not* CL). The system comes with a really good compiler; a debugger is in the works, but not ready just yet. It runs fine with Emacs (though we're building our own editor which will support Chez Scheme in a NeXTier way). And it's *small*. Chez Scheme is published by Cadence Research Systems, in Bloomington, IN. The cost is ~US$900 per machine, with a site licence (an entire physical campus) running at US$9000. Educational institutions get a 50% discount. Cadence provides excellent support (15% of pre-discount price per year), too. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with Cadence, other than as a customer. -- \ Vincent Manis <manis@cs.ubc.ca> "There is no law that vulgarity and \ Department of Computer Science literary excellence cannot coexist." /\ University of British Columbia -- A. Trevor Hodge / \ Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1W5 (604) 228-2394
marsella@porthos.rutgers.edu (Stacy Marsella) (09/10/90)
(Oh no, this is a nightmare... EVEN our MACII's have a decent common lisp- originally Coral's Allegro Common Lisp now under the Apple aegis) We too relied on having Common Lisp on our NeXT machine. Without it, we are severely restricted and can no longer run our AI system on the NeXT. Ports to other languages or even other dialects of lisp are simply not plausible at this juncture. Without Common Lisp (preferably Franz's), we will have to move completely to our SPARC'S. marsella@cogsci-1.rutgers.edu
marsella@porthos.rutgers.edu (Stacy Marsella) (09/10/90)
We too relied on having Common Lisp on our NeXT machine. Without it, we are severely restricted and can no longer run our AI system on the NeXT. Ports to other languages or even other dialects of lisp are simply not plausible at this juncture. Without Common Lisp (preferably Franz's), we will have to move completely to our SPARC'S, even for our music research. (EVEN our MACII's have a decent common lisp- the Allegro Common Lisp originally sold by Coral but now under the Apple aegis) marsella@cogsci-1.rutgers.edu
lange@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Trent Lange) (09/10/90)
In article <9480@ubc-cs.UUCP> manis@cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) writes: >I think it's too bad that Allegro CL isn't, apparently, going to be >bundled with the system (as with many rumours, I'll believe it when I >hear someone from NeXT confirm it officially). I certainly hope this is a rumor that turns out to be false, for I have been waiting for September 18 and the introduction of the 68040 machine to buy a NeXT. If it does not come with lisp, then I absolutely will not buy the machine. I would be saddened to have to buy a Mac IIfx or a stripped Sparcstation, but I cannot work without lisp. I also know of several other people considering the 68040 NeXT that couldn't buy a lispless machine either. I hope, for NeXT's sake, that they and Franz can work out whatever problems they may be having. Trent Lange Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90024
allen@carob.ssc.gov (Mike Allen) (09/11/90)
>>>>> On 8 Sep 90 09:16:35 GMT, jsaxon@cs.tamu.edu (James B Saxon) said: In article <8084@helios.TAMU.EDU> jsaxon@cs.tamu.edu (James B Saxon) writes: James> If you want Lisp on the NeXT, you'd better start complaining to NeXT James> because the ball's in their court. I've been told that Max Henry may James> be able to help out. He works at NeXT. When I complained about this, I was told: 1) No one uses CL. 2) How about if NeXT supplied KCL (Kyoto Common LISP)? (1) is obviously wrong, how about (2)? I have heard good things about KCL, but have never used it. Is KCL an acceptable substitute for Allegro CL? -- =============================================================================== Michael E. Allen SSC Laboratory MS-1046 2550 Beckleymeade Ave. Dallas, Texas 75237 (214)708-3031 allen@sscvx1.ssc.gov (Internet) allen@sscvx1 (Bitnet) SSCVX1::ALLEN (DecNet) But those who toiled knew nothing of the dreams of Those Who Planned; And the minds who planned the Tower of Babel Cared nothing for the workers who built it.
azure@portia.Stanford.EDU (Lai Heng Chua) (09/11/90)
I vote for Lisp too. We use frulekit and other Lisp stuff. With the new machine I hope NeXT would be able to run CYC too. Lisp and Obj-C together is cool. Right now it is a little hard to use (Sybase is hard to install and use too. Do you think these third party guys are doing a good job or is it NeXT's fault here?). Reminds me of Lisp on a terminal. I was looking forward to a Lisp development environment. But there is a price. Is Franz Inc. asking for something unreasonable? I don't know that NeXT is going to drop Sybase or Mathematica or Webster etc. Chua
rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) (09/11/90)
In article <ALLEN.90Sep10130706@carob.ssc.gov> allen@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes: >KCL, but have never used it. Is KCL an acceptable substitute for >Allegro CL? It is NOT a substitute, as Allegro CL is a lot faster and has all the support for the AppKit. No Appkit and a slow Lisp mean NO Lisp at all. Then I rather use a good fast Lisp and CLX on Xwindows although I hate X. Ronald ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." Bernhard Shaw | rca@cs.brown.edu or antony@browncog.bitnet
moose@svc.portal.com (09/13/90)
In article <Sep.9.22.30.13.1990.14033@porthos.rutgers.edu> marsella@porthos.rutgers.edu (Stacy Marsella) writes: >(Oh no, this is a nightmare... EVEN our MACII's have a decent common lisp- > originally Coral's Allegro Common Lisp now under the Apple aegis) > >We too relied on having Common Lisp on our NeXT machine. Without it, >we are severely restricted and can no longer run our AI system on the >NeXT. Ports to other languages or even other dialects of lisp are >simply not plausible at this juncture. Without Common Lisp (preferably >Franz's), we will have to move completely to our SPARC'S. > >marsella@cogsci-1.rutgers.edu Give me a break!!! Are you now claiming that your MACII's come bundled with common lisp? Nobody said you could not get LISP for it, just that you aren't forced to pay for it if you don't want it. If you are basing your entire platform on what bundled software comes with the machine, you have some serious problems. -- Michael Rutman | moose@svc.portal.com Cubist | makes me a NeXT programmer Software Ventures | That's in Berkeley smile, you're on standard disclaimer | <fill in with cute saying>
jmann@angmar.sw.stratus.com (Jim Mann) (09/14/90)
In article <1990Sep13.164117.11003@svc.portal.com>, moose@svc.portal.com writes: |> |>Are you now claiming that your MACII's come bundled with common lisp? |>Nobody said you could not get LISP for it, just that you aren't forced to pay |>for it if you don't want it. If you are basing your entire platform on what |>bundled software comes with the machine, you have some serious problems. In a way, I agree with you. However, one of NeXT's big sales pitches has been "Yes, if you just count hardware costs we may be more expensive, but look at software costs. The NeXT comes with X, Y, and Z, the Sun and the Mac do not. Thus, overall, NeXT is cheaper." If the software someone needs is no longer bundled, then perhaps for them the NeXT is no longer cheaper. Jim Mann Stratus Computer jmann@es.stratus.com
moose@svc.portal.com (09/14/90)
> >In a way, I agree with you. However, one of NeXT's big sales pitches has >been "Yes, if you just count hardware costs we may be more expensive, but >look at software costs. The NeXT comes with X, Y, and Z, the Sun and the >Mac do not. Thus, overall, NeXT is cheaper." If the software someone needs >is no longer bundled, then perhaps for them the NeXT is no longer cheaper. That is only assuming they leave their prices the same level and drop out bundled software. -- Michael Rutman | moose@svc.portal.com Cubist | makes me a NeXT programmer Software Ventures | That's in Berkeley smile, you're on standard disclaimer | <fill in with cute saying>
edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) (09/17/90)
In article <1990Sep13.164117.11003@svc.portal.com> moose@svc.portal.com writes: [stuff deleted] >Nobody said you could not get LISP for it, just that you aren't forced to pay >for it if you don't want it. If you are basing your entire platform on what >bundled software comes with the machine, you have some serious problems. This is one of the greatest things about the NeXT machine: the ability to rely upon lots of software so you can concentrate upon the base function of *your* applications. A database, editor, librarian, etc. are all available with an inter-application messaging system to tie them together. Yes, it's all still very first-generation and not well-evangelized, but nobody should be flamed for relying on bundled software... it was one of the things that NeXT hyped! What if NeXT unbundled their object run-time system? They would break applications. What if NeXT unbundles their Lisp run-time? They will break applications. NeXT has apparently decided that the apps that they would break are too few or too unimportant or otherwise not worth the effort to get Allegro back on track. That's a business decision. >-- >Michael Rutman | moose@svc.portal.com >Cubist | makes me a NeXT programmer >Software Ventures | That's in Berkeley >smile, you're on standard disclaimer | <fill in with cute saying> -- Edward Jung Microsoft Corp. My opinions do not reflect any policy of my employer.
phd_ivo@gsbacd.uchicago.edu (09/17/90)
In article <1990Sep14.161125.13181@svc.portal.com>, moose@svc.portal.com writes...
++
++In a way, I agree with you. However, one of NeXT's big sales pitches has
++been "Yes, if you just count hardware costs we may be more expensive, but
++look at software costs. The NeXT comes with X, Y, and Z, the Sun and the
++Mac do not. Thus, overall, NeXT is cheaper." If the software someone needs
++is no longer bundled, then perhaps for them the NeXT is no longer cheaper.
+
+That is only assuming they leave their prices the same level and drop out
+bundled software.
How about those of us who bought a NeXT because of the software? Presumably, we
thought we would have an upgradeable license, not just a disposable temporary
program, for which we would have to pay full price at the next release of the
OS.
I don't use LISP, but I do share Edward Jung's concern that by changing future
arrangements, NeXT can effectively make today's bundled licenses worth less. At
least, paid hardware doesn't go away with the next OS release.
/ivo welch ivo@next.agsm.ucla.edumarsella@porthos.rutgers.edu (Stacy Marsella) (09/17/90)
In article <1990Sep13.164117.11003@svc.portal.com>, moose@svc.portal.com writes: > In article ... marsella writes .. > >...EVEN our MACII's have a decent Common Lisp ... > > > >We too relied on having Common Lisp on our NeXT machine. Without it, > >we are severely restricted and can no longer run our AI system on the > >NeXT. Ports to other languages or even other dialects of lisp are > >simply not plausible at this juncture. Without Common Lisp (preferably > >Franz's), we will have to move completely to our SPARC'S. > > > > Give me a break!!! > > Are you now claiming that your MACII's come bundled with common lisp? > Nobody said you could not get LISP for it, just that you aren't forced to pay > for it if you don't want it. If you are basing your entire platform on what > bundled software comes with the machine, you have some serious problems. > > Michael Rutman I clearly did not mention bundling or expectations thereof! Common Lisp was purchased for all our platforms BUT the NeXT! And what is this "Are you now claiming ..."; I have made no previous claims or posts on this subject (the only previous post I made to this newsgroup that comes to mind was a question on the subject of SCSI interfacing and that was months ago?) My concern is getting a Common Lisp that has decent hooks into the NeXT software and hardware environment. In particular, those aspects of the NeXT that make it special and distinct from our Sparcs. (IB,DSP,..) Now if Franz is going to consider the NeXT as a serious platform for further development and sales of Common Lisp, I will be happy (but, given unboundling, poorer). But, it is worrisome given the relatively small installed base of NeXTs and the loss of a direct deal with NeXT (i.e. bundling).