stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) (03/20/90)
12 March 1990 NeXT COMMENTS
Stan Osborne
These are my personal comments and recollections expanded from
notes made during one of the NeXT demonstrations (11am) at
Pacific Bell on 9 March 1990.
Features mentioned during the demo were used to remind me of
problems or limitations that I was aware of. These were writ-
ten down as a reminder and have been converted here to more
detailed commentary.
The existence of these problems and limitations should not
overshadow the great advance in desktop computing that NeXT is
bringing to the market place. As NeXT likes to point out, they
are raising the common denominator to a new level. Competi-
tors of NeXT systems are now put in the position of having to
compete by enhancing a lower base product.
We all know good things take time to develop, especially good
software. In another 12 months many of the limitations and
problems mentioned here are likely to disappear. Hopefully
NeXT won't introduce to many new ones, either.
BACKGROUND
The event was hosted by David St. Pierre, Pacific Bell. The
introduction was done by Richard L. Miller, District Sales
Manager, NeXT. The demo was done by Michael A. Fried, Systems
Engineer, NeXT. The demo was a much smoother, better organ-
ized, and prepared version of the demo given to faculty at
SFSU over 1 year ago.
In addition to working as a consultant to a Pacific Bell
software development group, I'm employeed part-time by the
SFSU CS Department. My familiarity with NeXT equipment
started over one year ago when the Computer Science Department
at SFSU received its first NeXT system. The first system the
CS Dept. purchased was a "developer" configuration. The
software on this system has made the progression from software
release .8 to .9, and from .9 to the current 1.0 release. We
are quite happy with the equipment and the software and recom-
mend the system to others when the circumstances warrant. The
SFSU CS Dept now has four NeXTs, 2 in labs and 2 in faculty
offices.
SYSTEM FEATURES
o No file or compute servers
NeXT does not have a solution that allows the building of
a powerful compute or large i/o server from any of their
systems. It is possible to attach additional devices to
solve some of the i/o limitations. NeXT will sell 20
workstations that work together but does not have a
server to act as a central resource for these
workstations. Environments that require servers must use
and support multiple equipment manufacturers.
o Sound Support not provided in other NeXTStep environments
Many of the NeXTStep based applications demonstrated
today will not run on the base configurations for the
newly announced IBM workstations. The base IBM systems
do not have support for sound.
o Limited Fonts in base system
Very few fonts are provided even when a Laser printer is
purchased. People who have used the Macintosh or other
Adobe PostScript printers are quite disappointed by the
lack of fonts in the base system.
It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better
than a Mac for desktop publishing when the base system is
typographically incomplete.
o Limited Additional Fonts
Recently a few more fonts became available from Adobe,
but these must be licensed for each workstation. There
is still no way to get the choice of fonts possible for a
Mac.
It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better
than a Mac for desktop publishing when so little choice
is provided. Adobe took so long to release the few addi-
tional fonts now available and charges so much money for
them, Macs are still much better for desktop publishing.
Since Adobe has been involved with NeXT development from
the beginning, one wonders why it takes them so long to
provide so little support to the customers of a company
that has generated a lot of positive publicity. Is it
possible that Adobe is not taking NeXT seriously?
o European Language Accent Marks
The published documentation was supposedly made with
software tools on the NeXT (WriteNow). There are sec-
tions in French and elsewhere there is documentation on
how to make the accented european characters.
The release notes clearly state that the documented com-
posite key strokes to make accented characters do not
work. It is a bit misleading to say the documentation is
an example and then to also say it is impossible for oth-
ers to duplicate the examples.
o Big email messages are not compatible with other systems
The NeXT email support for pictures, documents, and sound
often makes the email messages gigantic. Most email sup-
port programs on other Unix systems have a limit on the
size of a message. This usually causes NeXT email routed
through other Unix systems to be truncated or lost
because they are too big.
What good is support for fancy email if you can't send it
to someone?
o SLIP is not easily available
Serial Line Internet Protocol is not provided nor is
there any information in the documentation on how one
obtains this software. People with NeXTs at home are not
able to establish a state-of-the-art network link with
computers at work without this software. This common Unix
software is used by NeXT to test the performance of their
serial ports.
Why is it so hard for customers who need this software to
find out about it or to obtain it?
SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
o Current versions of some AT&T C code does not easily port
An attempt was made to port to the NeXT the current ver-
sions of some C programs developed and licensed by AT&T.
The NeXT C compiler and other Unix tools would not work
to build these programs. It was determined that exten-
sive modification of source code would be necessary
before they could be built successfully. These same pro-
grams build without modification on Sun Workstations,
Intel/Xenix, and other Unix systems based on BSD 4.3 and
System V R3.
From this it is clear that NeXT's claim of "Unix Compati-
bility" is marketing rhetoric.
o Interface Builder requires time to master
Like any good software tool, Interface Builder can be
used in complex ways. Not everyone will be able to learn
the intricacies of Interface Builder or be able to use
them correctly and effectively.
Building applications with this tool does save a lot of
time. It is possible for beginners to build impressive
user interfaces. Yet, like all good tools, time and
talent are still needed before someone can honestly say
they have become a master of the tool.
o Interface Builder has no built in support for automated
testing
Interface Builder should have built in support for the
logging and playback of all users input/output events.
This functionality is required for automating the testing
of the application. Many organization have learned the
importance of using automated testing to sustain high
quality applications. A few are beginning to require this
functionality in their procurement specifications (e.g.
Pacific Bell, US Government agencies)
NeXT has done a wonderful job of reducing the effort (and
cost) required to develop a sophisticated user interface.
But this is extreamly missleading when the costs of the
complete lifecycle of an application are analyzed. It is
generally accepted that the initial coding phase is less
than 20% of the total costs involved in building an
application. The ease of building a user interface allows
more effort in this phase to be spent on creating a higer
quality application. It is also generally accepted that
50% or more of the costs are spent in testing and rework.
Thus any built in support for automated testing will
have, in the long run, a significant impact on the long
term quality of the application.
To automate testing is trivial when the application uses
simple interaction with a terminal. The Unix pipe mechan-
ism allows this I/O to be passed through special filters
that capture the needed information. The use of a
sophisticated graphical user interface (GUI) requires
support for testing be built into the GUI. If the
manufacturer does not build this into the GUI, it is
often nearly impossible for an end user to get around
this limitation.
When a new product, such as Interface Builder, is first
designed, it is usually quite easy to built in support
for creating an complete input/output transaction logging
mechanism. One only hopes that it is not to late for
this vital feature to be added as an improvement to
Interface Builder.
o Mach OS threads don't work with the supplied "C" library
The C library supplied by NeXT is not re-entrant. This
makes it difficult for an application designer to take
advantage of this important Mach feature.
NeXT APPLICATIONS
o WriteNow is a good demonstration program
People used to the Macintosh are quite disappointed by
the lack of functionality found in the default document
preparation tool. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT
system is better than a Mac for documentation when less
than the commonly understood and expected functionality
is provided.
o Mail Interface is a good demonstration program
When an individual receives a lot of electronic mail, the
NeXTStep email interface gets in the way. This is not
surprising when even the "Mailtool" provided by Sun
Microsystems for their workstations is only slightly
better. The ability to send pictures, documents, and
sound is wonderful and makes a good sales demonstration.
I receive lots of email yet 99% of this mail comes from
non-NeXT systems. What is NeXT doing to make it easier
for me to read and manage this correspondence? It is my
opinion that a lot can be done to make reading and manag-
ing the current volume of email an easier task.
NeXT should be taking a strong pro-active position with
the tools that are used heavily by everyone. Mail is a
good place to start. (The lack of a better user inter-
face to email is a personal peeve of mine. I don't think
this is the place for me to elaborate further.)
o No "Rollodex" application
Why must I get out my little black book to find the
address, telephone number, birthday, email address, etc.
for any of the people with whom I correspond?
In an object oriented environment a card filing system
should also be interfaced with email and document
preparation objects.
o No "Hypercard" like application
Support for multi media was plugged during the demonstra-
tion. Hypermedia and/or Hypertext are current hot areas
that are leading to understandable and easier to learn
applications.
Hypercard is available for every Mac. What does NeXT
have to offer?. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT
system is better than a Mac for non-programmers when less
than the commonly understood and expected functionality
is provided.
o Mathematica needs resources
It is unrealistic to imply that Mathematica works with
all system configurations. It is quite easy for simple
mathematical problems to quickly consume 100 Meg of page-
file space. This means the 8 Meg Ram and 40 Meg hard disk
provided with a base NeXT configuration will not support
Mathematica beginners. With the base system configura-
tion, Mathematica is, at best, a reason for purchasing
hardware upgrades at a later date.
3RD PARTY APPLICATIONS
o Frame is not suitable for building real books or docu-
ments
People who write sophisticated books and technical docu-
ments rely on bibliographic citations. Support for
bibliographies is a requirement not satisfied by Frame.
Thus Frame is not suitable for building books that are
for technical or academic readers.
At one point the demonstration relied on Frame's ability
to easily construct books. I know a professor who asked
specifically if Frame supported bibliographies. Both the
NeXT and Frame sales people enthusiastically said yes. A
copy of Frame was purchased based on their insistence
that Frame could make books. Now this professor is going
around saying that NeXT and Frame sales people told lies,
and that even they were fooled by their company's market-
ing rhetoric.
Similar enthusiasm and misrepresentation also occurred
with another 3rd Party company and product. Both NeXT
and its 3rd Party suppliers need to be careful they don't
get sued for making false claims.
o Still no spread sheet applications
If my memory serves me right, it was spread sheets that
made PCs take off in the business market place. NeXT now
claims to be aggressively pursuing the business market.
How can NeXT be taken seriously by the business community
when no spread sheet application was available when NeXT
said they were entering the business market? How can
NeXT be taken seriously by the business community now
that months have gone by and still no spread sheet appli-
cation is available?
o Many are 1st (beta test) versions
Most of the few 3rd party products available for the NeXT
are still in the first versions ever shipped to custo-
mers. Quite often functionality was left out in the rush
to ship the product. This means most of the 3rd party
products are really just in their first or second round
of beta testing.
o Many not yet available
NeXT documents that many companies are developing 3rd
party products. Many of these products have yet to see
the light of day. There may be copies for selective
individuals to evaluate, but people who purchased systems
to use with the touted 3rd party products are still wait-
ing to find out the price or when the first version will
ship.
COSTS
o List prices of 3rd party products are high compared with
Macintosh
People new to the Unix Workstation market are not expect-
ing the prices asked for 3rd party software. (A one time
Frame was asking $2600 for the NeXT product.)
o The base price per workstation is high
When many workstations are needed for work group unifor-
mity the cost per workstation is an important considera-
tion. Other workstation vendors are able to offer a base
workstation with a substantially lower (50% less) unit
price. When most of the software bundled with a NeXT
system is not needed a NeXT workstation is not a cost
effective solution. If the new X-Terminals on the market
are considered low end workstations, the price differ-
ences are even more pronounced.
--
Stan Osborne, Computer Science Department, San Francisco State University
Internet: stan@cs.sfsu.edu Usenet: cshub!stan Voice: (415) 338-2168melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/20/90)
In article <404@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes:
We all know good things take time to develop, especially good
software. In another 12 months many of the limitations and
problems mentioned here are likely to disappear. Hopefully
NeXT won't introduce to many new ones, either.
BACKGROUND
The event was hosted by David St. Pierre, Pacific Bell. The
introduction was done by Richard L. Miller, District Sales
Manager, NeXT. The demo was done by Michael A. Fried, Systems
Engineer, NeXT. The demo was a much smoother, better organ-
ized, and prepared version of the demo given to faculty at
SFSU over 1 year ago.
In addition to working as a consultant to a Pacific Bell
software development group, I'm employeed part-time by the
SFSU CS Department. My familiarity with NeXT equipment
started over one year ago when the Computer Science Department
at SFSU received its first NeXT system. The first system the
CS Dept. purchased was a "developer" configuration. The
software on this system has made the progression from software
release .8 to .9, and from .9 to the current 1.0 release. We
are quite happy with the equipment and the software and recom-
mend the system to others when the circumstances warrant. The
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SFSU CS Dept now has four NeXTs, 2 in labs and 2 in faculty
offices.
[MUCH DELETED]
So, when do the circumstances warrant buying a Next? After reading
your article you have me convinced that the Mac is definitely the way
to go. A 40Mhz Mac IIfx sans graphics coprocessor is looking pretty
good. Where does NeXT fit in the market? Will NeXT be here in 12
months? $600 million can only go so far! NeXT knew software was
going to be their big problem. Deja vu Steve? It took a year before
there was a good word processor for the Mac, or for that matter much
of anything besides Mac Draw and Mac Write? If DTP isn't a niche for
NeXT then what is? Can you say DeLorean?
-Mikejgreely@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) (03/20/90)
"Quite a machine, but not a Mac" ...and a good thing, too. In article <404@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: [bunches and bunches of interesting stuff. I'll try to trim it down to what's relevant] >The existence of these problems and limitations should not >overshadow the great advance in desktop computing that NeXT is >bringing to the market place. As NeXT likes to point out, they >are raising the common denominator to a new level. Minor formatting quibble: why on Earth did you indent all this, and (worse yet) right-justify it? It doesn't make it easier to follow your article. More relevantly, I'm not sure I can follow your point. NeXT hasn't raised the lowest common denominator yet, mostly because the vast majority of consumers haven't seen the machine in action, and, to be honest, a pokey 256 megabyte drive that's almost completely full doesn't exactly inspire me to purchase a base model. The seven revolutions in the ads are mostly marketing folks spinning their wheels. Where NeXT has succeeded so far is in forcing competitors to try to stomp them before they get too big (Sun's SparcStation, for example, which I'd *much* rather have a room full of). Personally, I'm damn glad to see it happening. Many of the ideas NeXT has put into their machine are excellent, and will favorably affect the computer marketplace. I'm just not sure that the machine that comes out on top will be a high-concept cube (with a PMS color logo). >SYSTEM FEATURES > o No file or compute servers I've heard this one acknowledged by folks inside the company as something that needs fixing, and I agree completely. A cube just doesn't have the power to handle extensive file service. Of course, this has to be looked at in the context of what they're trying to build. It's quite obvious from the supplied configurations and documentation that NeXT has been concentrating on small, homogenous networks. They really weren't planning on large-scale heterogenous networks, and many of the struggles people went through in 0.x drive this home. Then, of course, there's vision. When you're trying to build the machine of the future, sometimes you forget that it has to work alongside today's machines for a long time. Despite that, they did a pretty good job, and the support people have been extremely responsive when an oversight, incompatibility, or mistake turns up. When NeXT does something that the customers don't like, they fix it. 0.9 /bin/su and the 0.8 filesystem are the first two examples that come to mind, and there have been others. Some other companies aren't as responsive. > o Sound Support not provided in other NeXTStep environments I never thought of sound as a feature of the window system. Personally, I'd be more concerned with Unix incompatibilities among NeXTStep platforms than with the relatively minor issue of sound. The only sound I *need* from my computer is an error beep; the rest is icing. > o Limited Fonts in base system >Very few fonts are provided even when a Laser printer is >purchased. People who have used the Macintosh or other >Adobe PostScript printers are quite disappointed by the >lack of fonts in the base system. Yes, the decision to include only the LaserWriter font set was not the best, but it saved valuable disk space, and kept the price down a bit. And really, for general use, most people won't miss them. >It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better >than a Mac for desktop publishing when the base system is >typographically incomplete. "typographically incomplete" What an interesting phrase! Sounds just like a Mac to me (pre-ATM, that is). And, despite the former dearth of fonts, a NeXT *is* a better publishing machine than a Mac. It has the best TeX implementation I've seen, good previewers for DVI files and PostScript, an excellent laser printer, and a decent online dictionary (I'd kill for the OED, but we all have our little problems). The Mac has a wider software base, balanced by a horrible crufty "operating system". > o Limited Additional Fonts >Recently a few more fonts became available from Adobe, >but these must be licensed for each workstation. There >is still no way to get the choice of fonts possible for a >Mac. The Plus Pack is available now, and the whole Adobe font catalog is in the "any day now" stage, last I checked. Yes, they have to be licensed for each machine, but that's not new. My understanding is that there is a substantial savings when licensing fonts for use on up to 20 NeXTs. >Since Adobe has been involved with NeXT development from >the beginning, one wonders why it takes them so long to >provide so little support to the customers of a company >that has generated a lot of positive publicity. Is it >possible that Adobe is not taking NeXT seriously? Well, how many NeXTs have been sold? Of those, how many customers are unsatisfied with the supplied fonts? From what does Adobe get the majority of their revenue? I think the answers to these three questions might explain the time it took Adobe to get geared up to handle a third OS. > o European Language Accent Marks (comments on the missing accent support) "still a few bugs in the system" In the rush to avoid being labeled as vaporware, not everything got fixed in time for 1.0. I've never heard this denied by folks at NeXT, and 2.0 should go a long way towards smoothing the remaining rough spots. > o Big email messages are not compatible with other systems Another clash between a NeXT's natural habitat and the real world. But this isn't really their problem; the featuristic mailer just makes it easier for users to hit the ill-defined limits of foreign mailers. You might as well complain that they use uuencode, which won't go through Bitnet intact. Also, anyone who sticks to a local ethernet or the Internet likely won't notice this problem (and remember, uucp is not supported under 1.0!). > o SLIP is not easily available I can't argue with this one. There has been a working SLIP driver for quite some time, and I haven't been able to get ahold of it. Phooey. >Serial Line Internet Protocol is not provided nor is >there any information in the documentation on how one >obtains this software. People with NeXTs at home are not >able to establish a state-of-the-art network link with >computers at work without this software. People with NeXTs at home, unless they are associated with a university, are unlikely to be able to make any use of SLIP. Better yet, without a fair amount of Unix knowledge, it's not going to do them much good. Since NeXT is trying to build a computer for the naive user, I'm not surprised that it's not bundled. >SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT > o Current versions of some AT&T C code does not easily port >An attempt was made to port to the NeXT the current ver- >sions of some C programs developed and licensed by AT&T. >The NeXT C compiler and other Unix tools would not work >to build these programs. More details, please (preferably by email). I've had a lot of problems trying to work with foreign code, but nothing as bad as you make it sound. I *did* give up on ksh under release 0.9, but nothing has been so rough that it needed "extensive modification of source code". >From this it is clear that NeXT's claim of "Unix Compati- >bility" is marketing rhetoric. Naaah. Without more details on the packages you had problems with, and the problems you had, all I can say is that the software isn't as portable as you thought it was. No, NeXT Mach is not precisely 4.3 BSD Unix, but it's a lot closer than, for example, HP-UX 6.5. >NeXT APPLICATIONS > o WriteNow is a good demonstration program So's MacWrite. 'Nuff said. > o Mail Interface is a good demonstration program Actually it's not a bad mailer for a novice. It's a bit like Elm, although Elm has had more time to mature. Fortunately, NeXT doesn't lock you into it. > o No "Rollodex" application ...and the wind cried "third-party!" > o No "Hypercard" like application My heart *bleeds* for you. :-) My opinion of Hypercard was extremely high until I actually used it for a while. Great idea, lousy implementation. NeXT has built some fairly nice tools, and the market can handle the rest. >Hypercard is available for every Mac. What does NeXT >have to offer?. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT >system is better than a Mac for non-programmers when less >than the commonly understood and expected functionality >is provided. The NeXT comes with a nifty ice pick, which I find far more useful than HYPErcard. "commonly understood and expected functionality"???? Sorry, I don't buy that one. When I owned a Mac, I did interesting and useful things with Hypercard, like build an online drink-mixing guide and a character generator for role-playing games. All of this lasted until I realized that I was playing the spreadsheet game all over again (that is, using the wrong tool for the job, just because it was available). >3RD PARTY APPLICATIONS > o Frame is not suitable for building real books or docu- > ments Hmmmm. I could have sworn I'd heard otherwise from people who'd done it. Maybe someone from Frame can comment? > o Still no spread sheet applications >If my memory serves me right, it was spread sheets that >made PCs take off in the business market place. NeXT now >claims to be aggressively pursuing the business market. Nobody ever said they were *succeeding*, did they? The extremely unofficial sales figures I've heard suggest that there hasn't been much interest in business yet. Small wonder that the spreadsheet folks are dragging their feet. And of course the business people won't buy until their applications exist, and round and round... > o Many are 1st (beta test) versions >This means most of the 3rd party products are really just in their >first or second round of beta testing. Like, say, Microsoft Word 4.0 for the Mac? :-) >COSTS > o List prices of 3rd party products are high compared with > Macintosh Prices tend to get scaled based on expected sales. As long as the number of existing NeXTs remains small, don't expect this to change. "I stopped thinking of HyperTalk as a real programming language when I realized that 'get line 1 of card field short name of the target' was *concise*." -- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
izumi@violet.berkeley.edu (Izumi Ohzawa) (03/20/90)
In article <Ety5g43@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >In article <404@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: >So, when do the circumstances warrant buying a Next? After reading When you see dead end in PC's including Macs with no real multitasking OS with memory management, etc..... Kind of people who bought Apple LaserWriters for their IBM PC's 4-5 years ago, when everybody else was buying HP LaserJet, are now buying NeXT now, I think. HPLJ was cheaper, supported more by PC software then. It has served the users well, but it's time is over without PS cartridges. Izumi Ohzawa, izumi@violet.berkeley.edu
rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) (03/20/90)
In article <404@toaster.SFSU.EDU> stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) writes: > o Interface Builder requires time to master The Mac Programming environment takes longer, particularly if your programmers are thousands of line long or longer. > o No "Hypercard" like application The newest version of Frame support hypertext links. It is not yet a complete programming environment like HyperTalk, but you can make some pretty nifty interactive online documents.
jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) (03/21/90)
/ comp.sys.next / jgreely@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) / Mar 20, 1990 / > Fortunately, NeXT doesn't lock you into [Mail application as mail user > agent] Doesn't it? What's the format of Next-attachments: line? I use MMDF on my machine because I can't stand sendmail. I use 'msg' and 'send' as my user agents because Mail (by "Mail" I mean the NeXT Mail application, not /usr/ucb/Mail) is not configurable to work with any Mail Transfer Agent other than sendmail, and because Mail's user interface is less user-friendly than msg's (although it is much prettier). For example, in msg I can hit 'h' (expands to "headers") 'f' (expands to "from") "greely" and it will list the headers of all messages from J Greely that I have saved in my big "next" mailbox. In Mail, you have to visually scan the headers, which makes it poorly suited for people who get large volume of mail. However, by switching to 'msg', I loose my "NeXT mail" capabilities. I can't easily read RTF-formated messages and those that include pictures, voice and WriteNow documents. I can manually uudecode/untar/etc, but it's a hassle. Similarly, I cannot use 'send' to easily produce such mail. So what are my options? Well, the easiest fix would be to modify Mail to have an option to work with other MTAs -- I would do MMDF, and somebody else could do SMAIL. But Ne"nah, you don't need sources"XT doesn't think so. Another option would be to write a reader for "NeXT mail" into which one can just pipe a "NeXT mail" message from msg. But NeXT doesn't think we need to know the semantics of the Next-attachments: line. A third option is to write a complete GUI-based user agent to replace Mail, and I've actually done some work on that, but had to set it aside because I need to get my PhD finished... (If anybody is interested in seeing what I got, I can mail it to them.) So true, we may not be locked into using Mail, but we certainly have a few Dobermans to fight off! Jacob -- Jacob Gore Jacob@Gore.Com boulder!gore!jacob
mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) (03/21/90)
If I may make a plug, my MailManager and EasyMail (baby version of
MailManager) applications for the NeXT do a lot of what the old
tty-based tools do. You can do the equivalent of the old familiar (to
MM or msg users) "headers answered from smith since 1-jan-90", but in
a nice GUI style. Not surprising, actually, since one of the authors
of MM designed it.
This software was designed to be used in the real, gritty, Internet
environment. It doesn't have pretty things like pictures or sound in
mail (yet). Instead, it scales well for mailboxes with thousands of
messages. Pictures and sound will come eventually, but my users care
more about getting an address book (in progress now) in first.
I've used it as my primary mail tool for almost a year now. The only
time I use the tty-mail tools any more is which I log in via modem, or
when reading mail written in Japanese (since NeXTStep doesn't support
kanji fonts I have to use kterm under X windows).
MailManager/EasyMail work on remote mail files via the IMAP protocol
and on local Berkeley-format mail files.
We've been holding off a formal release pending the address book and a
new release of the IMAP daemon from Stanford University. However, if
you'd like a beta copy, please contact me.
_____ ____ ---+--- /-\ Mark Crispin Atheist & Proud
_|_|_ _|_ || ___|__ / / 6158 Lariat Loop NE R90/6 pilot
|_|_|_| /|\-++- |=====| / / Bainbridge Island, WA "Gaijin! Gaijin!"
--|-- | |||| |_____| / \ USA 98110-2098 "Gaijin ha doko ka?"
/|\ | |/\| _______ / \ +1 (206) 842-2385 "Niichan ha gaijin."
/ | \ | |__| / \ / \ mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU "Chigau. Gaijin ja nai.
kisha no kisha ga kisha de kisha-shita Omae ha gaijin darou."
sumomo mo momo, momo mo momo, momo ni mo iroiro aru "Iie, boku ha nihonjin."
uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru "Souka. Yappari gaijin!"eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (03/21/90)
In article <JGREELY.90Mar20070141@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu> J Greely <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >> o SLIP is not easily available > >I can't argue with this one. There has been a working SLIP driver >for quite some time, and I haven't been able to get ahold of it. >Phooey. > >People with NeXTs at home, unless they are associated with a >university, are unlikely to be able to make any use of SLIP. Better >yet, without a fair amount of Unix knowledge, it's not going to do >them much good. Since NeXT is trying to build a computer for the >naive user, I'm not surprised that it's not bundled. 1) In the San Francisco Bay Area, BARRNET is offering low-cost SLIP service--and not just to Universities. While a bit pricey for home use, quite reasonable for small business customers. Don't forget AlterNet either. Besides, no one said that you had to be Internet-connected to use SLIP. Lots of places use TCP/IP in-house. 2) As for "not quite a Mac," the A/UX 2.0 literature released on 3/19/1990 states that SLIP is included and supported. [ I'm not just looking for SLIP support; I expect NeXT to keep up with things. Right now that means SLIP with Van Jacobson's Header Compression. Soon it will mean PPP. Hopefully one day we'll all be able to get ISDN-BRI at home (56Kb all-digital). ] -=EPS=-
rogerj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) (03/21/90)
In article <Ety5g43@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >So, when do the circumstances warrant buying a Next? After reading >your article you have me convinced that the Mac is definitely the way >to go. A 40Mhz Mac IIfx sans graphics coprocessor is looking pretty (stuff here) I just saw a complete demo of the newest MAC IIfx yesterday. Mighty impressive! There's a tool available there (bundled free with A/UX) called "COMMANDO". You open a "shell" window and begin to type a standard unix "grep" command. Sometime during the string of fancy flags, you forget the flag you need. You hit Cmnd-K and a window pops up with ALL of grep's flag for you. You click the ones you need. Not only can you now save this "command macro" for use later, but you never have to pull up a man page (and wait until the bottom of the page to see the feature you need) to remember commands. You could also bag unix altogether and use the MAC interface with ANY of HUNDREDS of MAC software tools all in nicely DMA'd and virtualized A/UX with BSD extensions. OK, it's not DPS, but you can get your work done without having to wait for third party people to follow your lead into the next century (as only you view it Steve...). It was really nice! They also distrubute A/UX on CD-ROM (read-only, Steve wins there) but, get this, they forgot X11 on the distribution CD...also their CD ROM drive is NOT cheap! So Steve has some points still and he did force the lowest denom. But, uh, HEY NEXT! The market ain't standing still! Better get your act in gear with a little more compatibility and some better (read faster cheaper) technology! Thank you again for your support! --Roger Jagoda --Cornell University --FQOJ@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) (03/22/90)
In article <9942@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> rogerj@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) writes: >I just saw a complete demo of the newest MAC IIfx yesterday. Mighty >impressive! There's a tool available there (bundled free with A/UX) >called "COMMANDO". Excuse my ignorance, but isn't this the "Commando" that has in the Apple MPW environment for years? MPW may look neat in a sales demo, but let me assure you that MPW has got to be the absolute worst programming environment it has ever been my misfortune to use. I will agree with any comments that the ball is in NeXT's court to do something or fall behind. _____ ____ ---+--- /-\ Mark Crispin Atheist & Proud _|_|_ _|_ || ___|__ / / 6158 Lariat Loop NE R90/6 pilot |_|_|_| /|\-++- |=====| / / Bainbridge Island, WA "Gaijin! Gaijin!" --|-- | |||| |_____| / \ USA 98110-2098 "Gaijin ha doko ka?" /|\ | |/\| _______ / \ +1 (206) 842-2385 "Niichan ha gaijin." / | \ | |__| / \ / \ mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU "Chigau. Gaijin ja nai. kisha no kisha ga kisha de kisha-shita Omae ha gaijin darou." sumomo mo momo, momo mo momo, momo ni mo iroiro aru "Iie, boku ha nihonjin." uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru "Souka. Yappari gaijin!"
eb1z+@andrew.cmu.edu (Edward Joseph Bennett) (03/22/90)
This has been an interesting discussion but I have another problem with NEXT. And that is that hardware, software, and compatability aside Steve Jobs has lost his credibility in my eyes. Apple annonced their IIfx like they do most of their machines: available immediately. It was nearly a year after the release of NEXT until you could actually by one with a finshed OS. So even if NEXT annonced a new cube today that fixed all its problems I would be unimpressed until I actually saw it in the stores because if it takes another year its innovation will be common place by the time it hits the market like the last cube. Also what was all Steve's bull about education only, It was good publicity but I don't think he was ever serious about it. I think he could be profitable or possible when he said it. Other problems aside Jobs will also have to do alot to fix his credibility before I'll consider a NEXT. ED
rogerj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) (03/23/90)
In article <6329@blake.acs.washington.edu> mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes: >Excuse my ignorance, but isn't this the "Commando" that has in the >Apple MPW environment for years? MPW may look neat in a sales demo, >but let me assure you that MPW has got to be the absolute worst >programming environment it has ever been my misfortune to use. > Yup, it is the same Commando from MPW which is STILL the worst environment in which to be forced to program in. Notice I didn't mention it as a programmer's tool, but as an end-user's learning tool...which is isn't half bad. >I will agree with any comments that the ball is in NeXT's court to do >something or fall behind. Yes, I agree. I just hope that with NeXT's incredible gag order, people don't think NeXT isn't doing anything to try to make their product better. I didn't want to propose that since A/UX 2.0 came out NeXT was doomed. Far from it, Apple is legitimizing NeXT's approach by trying to copy it (friendly GUI over UNIX). I'm sure NeXT will be ahead of the II F_ingXpensive withtheir NeXT machine...I just wisj they'd talk about it some more so my managment will stop telling me to spec other machines from Sales Reps that can discuss future plans. __Roger Jagoda __Cornell University __FQOJ@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (03/23/90)
[Roger: The Followup-To: header is for newsgroups, not e-mail addresses. You made things difficult... ] In article <9958@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> rogerj@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) writes: >Yes, I agree. I just hope that with NeXT's incredible gag order, people >don't think NeXT isn't doing anything to try to make their product >better. There's a wonderful response to this in the March 19, 1990 issue of _MicroTimes_ ("California's Computer Magazine") in Jim Warren's "Realizable Fantasies" column. Note: This is copyrighted material by the author. I think this small excerpt qualifies as fair use, and I'm not going to trim it down lest I be accused of quoting out of context, which is the second-worst journalistic offense (the first being spelling someone's name wrong). Besides, the last time I wanted to use something from MicroTimes I asked for permission "the right way" and they didn't even have the decency to respond. I ended up not using the material. Note that I am giving proper attribution, I'm not doing this for commercial gain, and they are getting free publicity out of it. Since usenet doesn't permit commercial activity in technical groups, I'll just refer you to their e-mail addresses, microx@well.sf.ca.us or MICROTIMES@MCIMAIL.COM if you want to get in touch with them. It's a fine publication, even if their staff have been ----heads about reproduction permissions. (They ARE reading this.) ----- begin quoted material ----- Fixing the Vaporware Problem All but the most naively new computer users know of vaporware-- exciting new ``products,'' announced but unavailable. Their promoters' cliche': ``We won't ship until the product is absolutely solid.'' _Hah!_ [he snorts]. If we can't get it, it's not a ``product.'' There _are_ examples of companies exercising the ethical fortitude of withholding product announcements until they actually have 'em. E.g., when Borland recently announced Turbo Pascal 5.5 with OOP extensions (object-oriented programming)-- _hot dang!_--they distributed a six-foot high stack of _real_- ware, on the spot. When DigiFont announced super-cheap LaserJet font packages--by golly--they shipped 'em, literally, the next day. ----- end quoted material ----- > I didn't want to propose that since A/UX 2.0 came out NeXT was >doomed. Far from it, Apple is legitimizing NeXT's approach by trying >to copy it (friendly GUI over UNIX). IMHO, they're taking very different approaches. The NeXT _User's Reference_ says on p. 1, "You can also enter UNIX(R) commands on the NeXT Computer; however, most users won't need to do this during the normal course of their work." NeXT advocates *hiding* UNIX from users; Apple's Commando is quite the opposite: it promotes UNIX literacy by constructing actual shell commands for you. Once you learn them, you don't need the "training wheels." Apple's "friendly GUI" has a name: MultiFinder. It's little different from the same old Mac interface they've been pushing for years, except it's using a UNIX file system with file protection--hopefully making it somewhat more resistant to the COMPUTER VIRUSES that give MacOS its "Typhoid Mary" reputation. So what if A/UX will run "hundreds of Macintosh applications." You can buy 386-based UNIX systems that will run thousands of MS-DOS applications. The ONLY "GUI UNIX" program you get with A/UX 2.0 (according to their literature) is a mouse-based editor. There are REAL applications for the NeXT. (I don't want to get into comparing A/UX and Mach, other than to note that they're, well, Apples and ...) > I'm sure NeXT will be ahead of >the II F_ingXpensive withtheir NeXT machine... They already are. The *only* thing Apple has to crow about is the 40 MHz clock speed. Other than that it's basically half of what the NeXT is now. Compare retail prices for realistic configurations, and NeXT wins. All NeXT needs to do now is release a low-cost upgrade to a faster 68030 (or 68040) and that's pretty much going to be the end of this discussion. The IIfx is just not a workstation-class machine. It's what the Mac II should have been to begin with. -=EPS=-
lange@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Trent Lange) (03/23/90)
In article <419@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: > >> I'm sure NeXT will be ahead of >>the II F_ingXpensive withtheir NeXT machine... > >They already are. The *only* thing Apple has to crow about is >the 40 MHz clock speed. Other than that it's basically half of >what the NeXT is now. Compare retail prices for realistic >configurations, and NeXT wins. Is this necessarily true? Retail prices don't matter. For people in academia, the University prices do, and even for people outside, the street price of Macs are usually close to the academic prices. And, looking at UCLA's prices, a basic IIfx with 4 megs goes for $5949. Sure, add in a full-page monitor, video card, and keyboard, and you're up to $7100 - exactly what UCLA's price for a NeXT is. Yes, that NeXT will have the OD, but frankly, I'd rather have the Mac's floppy. Third-party hard disks are going to run about the same for either. The DSP? Nice, but what is anybody doing with it? NeXTStep? I don't want to develop applications, so how does it help me? Sure, the NeXT comes bundled with applications, but so what? If you want to do any serious WYSIWYG word processing or graphics you're going to have to buy applications. And the Mac's are far cheaper, and so far, better - if you can even find an equivalent application for the NeXT (e.g. spreadsheets). All in all, a fully-configured NeXT will be somewhat cheaper than a Mac IIfx (especially including A/UX), but not by a whole lot. >All NeXT needs to do now is release a low-cost upgrade to a faster >68030 (or 68040) and that's pretty much going to be the end of this >discussion. The IIfx is just not a workstation-class machine. > > -=EPS=- What makes you say this? It seems that the IIfx has solved the biggest problem with previous Macs: the lack of a DMA controller. Add in its other new dedicated I/O processors, the 40 MHz '030, and A/UX 2.0, and what does it lack to be considered a "workstation-class machine"? Now, I'm not a hardware engineer, and I don't know everything about the throughput of the NeXT's total useable hardware vs the IIfx's. But, if A/UX 2.0 turns out to be everything it's cracked up to be, in just exactly what ways (besides bells and whistles) is the NeXT a better workstation? I'd really like to know, because I'm currently trying to decide between the two, and the hardware and A/UX of the IIfx has (currently) removed all of my performance qualms about going with the Mac. - Trent Lange ********************************************************************** * College Basketball Fever: Catch it! * * Yeah, I mixed my slogans. So what are you going to do about it? * **********************************************************************
lih@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Andrew Lih) (03/27/90)
In article <33411@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> lange@lanai.UUCP (Trent Lange) writes: >In article <419@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: >> >>All NeXT needs to do now is release a low-cost upgrade to a faster >>68030 (or 68040) and that's pretty much going to be the end of this >>discussion. The IIfx is just not a workstation-class machine. > >What makes you say this? It seems that the IIfx has solved the biggest >problem with previous Macs: the lack of a DMA controller. Add in >its other new dedicated I/O processors, the 40 MHz '030, and A/UX 2.0, >and what does it lack to be considered a "workstation-class machine"? > >Now, I'm not a hardware engineer, and I don't know everything about the >throughput of the NeXT's total useable hardware vs the IIfx's. But, >if A/UX 2.0 turns out to be everything it's cracked up to be, in just >exactly what ways (besides bells and whistles) is the NeXT a better >workstation? I saw the Mac IIfx running A/UX 2.0 just last week a day after its announcement and got to sit in front of one for about a half hour and played with it. When running MacX (with 1 session and the Motif Window Manager) and two Mac OS programs (Swivel 3D, and another), it was kind of sluggish. The X implementation (1.07) was slow, and I found XNeXT to be much quicker. Many times, it would take a few seconds for a menu to pop up on the root window. Of course, the NeXT does not have the color that the Mac does. I did not get to see the Mac IIfx running plain MacOS, but the A/UX 2.0 implementation seems to be much better than the old A/UX, but performance was not as quick as I thought it would be... /lih ___________________________________________________________ """""""""" / \ | @ @ | | Andrew "Fuz" Lih Columbia University Center | < > > ___/ Academic Computing for Computing Activities | \ \__/ / <___ / \____/ \ lih@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu AJLUS@CUVMB.BITNET / \ lih@cs.columbia.edu ...rutgers!columbia!cunixc!lih | \__________________________________________________________/ ___________________________________________________________ """""""""" / \ | @ @ | | Andrew "Fuz" Lih Columbia University Center | < > > ___/ Academic Computing for Computing Activities |
pascal@altitude.CAM.ORG (Pascal Gosselin) (03/28/90)
lih@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Andrew Lih) writes: >I saw the Mac IIfx running A/UX 2.0 just last week a day after its >announcement and got to sit in front of one for about a half hour and >played with it. When running MacX (with 1 session and the Motif >Window Manager) and two Mac OS programs (Swivel 3D, and another), it >was kind of sluggish. The X implementation (1.07) was slow, and I >found XNeXT to be much quicker. Many times, it would take a few >seconds for a menu to pop up on the root window. Of course, the NeXT >does not have the color that the Mac does. >I did not get to see the Mac IIfx running plain MacOS, but the A/UX >2.0 implementation seems to be much better than the old A/UX, but >performance was not as quick as I thought it would be... MacX does not give you a true feeling of the IIfx's power. You see, MacX running under AU/X (that is, ROOTLESS mode where X is running within MultiFinder windows with Multifinder running as an AU/X 2.0 process) will always be a bit slower than the dedicated X screen mode (ROOTED). The version of MacX that you saw was VERY EARLY BETA.... The Apple guy doing our demo told us that the next Beta release is 10times faster in Rootless mode! Please do not confuse the Multifinder process and AU/X programs. The ROOTED mode, I can assure you, is certainly faster than Display Postscript on a Next... Especially with the 8.24GC board, with it's off-screen drawing capabilites and 30Mhz Heater! -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Pascal Gosselin | Internet: pascal@altitude.CAM.ORG | | Computer Connection Inc. | (514) 674-1514 CIS: 72757,1570 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
hammersslammers1@oxy.edu (David J. Harr) (03/30/90)
Pascal Gosselin says: >Please do not confuse the MultiFinder process and A/UX programs. The ROOTED >mode, I can assure you, is certainly faster than Display Postscript on a >NeXT...30 MHz heater! FLAME ON! If it's one thing I hate, it's people who talk without knowing what they are talking about. FLAME OFF. In other words, it's a 25 MHz heater. ^^ (Sorry, Pascal, I just couldn't resist. 8 :-)). David
mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) (03/30/90)
I just remembered another "feature" about the Mac, which reminds me
why I intend never again to do software development on the Mac
platform. Like MS-DOS, the Mac operating system splits memory into
64K segment; no object may be larger than that. So, if you need a
100,000 character string, you have to split it into chunks.
Also, there's no memory mapping, so system memory management is done
by shuffling. The way they do this is by a bizarre system of double-
indirect pointers. Although this is OK for memory-tight systems, it's
a lot of work for the programmer to keep track and for large memory
systems this is slower than allocating enough memory for the
application to begin with and shuffling it to a larger chunk with a
single base register than making all those double-indirect references.
I guess this was all for CP/M compatibility. ;-)
_____ ____ ---+--- /-\ Mark Crispin Atheist & Proud
_|_|_ _|_ || ___|__ / / 6158 Lariat Loop NE R90/6 pilot
|_|_|_| /|\-++- |=====| / / Bainbridge Island, WA "Gaijin! Gaijin!"
--|-- | |||| |_____| / \ USA 98110-2098 "Gaijin ha doko ka?"
/|\ | |/\| _______ / \ +1 (206) 842-2385 "Niichan ha gaijin."
/ | \ | |__| / \ / \ mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU "Chigau. Gaijin ja nai.
kisha no kisha ga kisha de kisha-shita Omae ha gaijin darou."
sumomo mo momo, momo mo momo, momo ni mo iroiro aru "Iie, boku ha nihonjin."
uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru "Souka. Yappari gaijin!"mwilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) (03/30/90)
In article <6453@blake.acs.washington.edu> mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) writes: > >I just remembered another "feature" about the Mac, which reminds me >why I intend never again to do software development on the Mac >platform. Like MS-DOS, the Mac operating system splits memory into >64K segment; no object may be larger than that. So, if you need a >100,000 character string, you have to split it into chunks. > >Also, there's no memory mapping, so system memory management is done >by shuffling. [ stuff deleted ] Not to get into any sort of machine war or anything, but... Your comments on memory mapping are well taken. However, memory is NOT split into 64K segments. Only certain types of data ever had a size restriction. Furthermore, at this time there are no such size restrictions on any data type. The only restriction which still stands in practice is that relocatable code blocks must be less than 32K. However, since you can split your code into as many as you like, that's not a problem. Things have changed a lot in the Mac world over the past several years. You might consider giving it another look. In my opinion, features have been added and many things have gotten simpler at the same time. -- Mark Wilkins mwilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu DISCLAIMER: Read the Followup-to: line before flaming.
minich@a.cs.okstate.edu (MINICH ROBERT JOHN) (04/07/90)
From article <6453@blake.acs.washington.edu>, by mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin): > > I just remembered another "feature" about the Mac, which reminds me > why I intend never again to do software development on the Mac > platform. Like MS-DOS, the Mac operating system splits memory into > 64K segment; no object may be larger than that. So, if you need a > 100,000 character string, you have to split it into chunks. Well, either you haven't looked real close or you are just remembering something from someone who heard that it was said... There is no problem on the Mac with big chunks of data. That is what the Memory Manager is great at! Just ask for a chunk of arbitrary size, and if it can be provided, you've got it. What I think has gotten into your head somewhere is the limit on the size of single objects in the resource _file_ (32K) where other considerations are at work. This is not a real big prob IMHO, and I certainly prefer to have the Resource Manager rather than writing my own code to attempt something analagous. > Also, there's no memory mapping, so system memory management is done > by shuffling. The way they do this is by a bizarre system of double- > indirect pointers. Although this is OK for memory-tight systems, it's > a lot of work for the programmer to keep track and for large memory > systems this is slower than allocating enough memory for the > application to begin with and shuffling it to a larger chunk with a > single base register than making all those double-indirect references. Yes, the Mac's memory management does "shuffling" and uses double indirection, but the concept is very clean in use. And if you ask anyone who uses big apps regularly, you'll find that all computers are "memory-tight systems". :-) No, it's NOT a lot of work for programmers to keep track of things with handles. (IMHO, again.) Just make sure there is something on the end of a handle before you use it, and your fine. About the base register BS... if the Mac's memory was segmented by hardware into chunks, this _might_ be worthwhile, but it isn't. Now, if you mean you want a base register for a big chunk you get back from the memory manager to divy up yourself, that's fine and you can do that if you want. (Of course, some assembly required. :-) I think you'd do well to talk with someone who has actually written for the Mac about these "details" before you go to far in putting them down. There are definite limitations, but not at all the ones you describe. > I guess this was all for CP/M compatibility. ;-) naaaw, they did it for clone protection! :^) Robert Minich Oklahoma State University minich@a.cs.okstate.edu -- Robert Minich
mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) (04/10/90)
In article <5522@okstate.UUCP> minich@a.cs.okstate.edu (MINICH ROBERT JOHN) writes: > I think you'd do well to talk with someone who has actually written >for the Mac about these "details" before you go to far in putting them >down. There are definite limitations, but not at all the ones you >describe. One clarification: I *have* written for the Mac. I quit that job 2.5 years ago. So I've forgotten the exact gory details in 2.5 years. I must have gone to some effort to purge the details -- and MPW, and MPW C -- out of my mind. The fact still remains that the Mac was the *worst* programming environment I have ever dealt with. The best programming environment, by the way, was not the NeXT; it was Xerox Lisp machines for a graphic interface and DEC-20's for a TTY interface. Both of these, however, are dead systems. One detail I do remember is that object assignment via malloc() is very slow on the Mac. If you need to create lots of small objects (e.g. strings in a data structure) you are much better off creating a single large object and subdividing it yourself than individual small objects; the difference is seconds of real time. Of course, Mac programmers will tell you that you shouldn't use malloc(). No matter that you're porting a large library and merely want to put a Mac user interface on top of it; their answer is "you should rewrite it." The NeXT environment sometimes betrays this attitude too; fortunately it is generally possible to ignore it. Let me say this; I have nothing but admiration and respect for those individuals who develop software for the Mac. No one is calling you "stupid", or telling you you should migrate to the NeXT. There really is no comparison between the two machines. Some Mac users/programmers may well want to migrate to a NeXT, but they're the guys who wanted more out of a Mac than a Mac was going to deliver anyway. You won't see people migrating from a NeXT to a Mac; if NeXT goes under then SUN, IBM, DEC, etc. will be the beneficiaries. _____ ____ ---+--- /-\ Mark Crispin Atheist & Proud _|_|_ _|_ || ___|__ / / 6158 Lariat Loop NE R90/6 pilot |_|_|_| /|\-++- |=====| / / Bainbridge Island, WA "Gaijin! Gaijin!" --|-- | |||| |_____| / \ USA 98110-2098 "Gaijin ha doko ka?" /|\ | |/\| _______ / \ +1 (206) 842-2385 "Niichan ha gaijin." / | \ | |__| / \ / \ mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU "Chigau. Gaijin ja nai. kisha no kisha ga kisha de kisha-shita Omae ha gaijin darou." sumomo mo momo, momo mo momo, momo ni mo iroiro aru "Iie, boku ha nihonjin." uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru "Souka. Yappari gaijin!"