tierney@lbl-csam.arpa (Brian Tierney [SFSU Computer Science Dept]) (11/23/89)
I have a Next in the same office where I work, and I've used it some,
and think it's a really great machine. But the question occurs to me,
who will actually spend money on this machine? Who are they marketing
this thing for? They can't possibly expect to make much money on the
University market alone.
First, why I would never buy one:
I need (and have on my Sun SPARCstation) AT LEAST 30M of ram and
a 12 MIP machine. I also need to be able to run X windows. For about
the same price as a Next, I get this with a SparcStation (true, it's a
diskless node, and disks are expensive, but you get the point).
And to any scientists out there who say 'I don't need 30M of RAM or
X windows', just a 1-2 years, you will.
Second, why Joe average will never buy one:
It's too damn expensive, and a $1000 AT clone run's all the
software he needs.
Third, the business community:
Here, I'm not sure, but it seems most company's would rather spend
$4000 for a 386 machine running Xenix and an 80M drive than $10,000
for a Next with a 330M drive. We'll see...
Is there another major group I'm forgetting (remember, Universities
don't really count, they get such a big discount).
So in general, the Next seems to be not powerful enough for the scientific
community, and too expensive for everbody else.
Anyone care to comment?
--
/---------------------------------------v-------------------------------------\
| Brian Tierney, Computer Graphics Lab | internet: tierney@george.lbl.gov |
| Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories | or arpa: tierney@lbl-csam.arpa |
\---------------------------------------^-------------------------------------/hughes@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (larry hughes) (11/23/89)
In article <4283@helios.ee.lbl.gov> tierney@lbl-csam.arpa (Brian Tierney [SFSU Computer Science Dept]) writes: > >Second, why Joe average will never buy one: > It's too damn expensive, and a $1000 AT clone run's all the >software he needs. Today. Not tomorrow. In the early 80's, people were saying "Why by an IBM PC, when my C/PM system runs all the software I need?" >Third, the business community: > Here, I'm not sure, but it seems most company's would rather spend >$4000 for a 386 machine running Xenix and an 80M drive than $10,000 >for a Next with a 330M drive. We'll see... I don't agree...give a dog and pony show of a NeXT and a '386/Xenix machine to a team of high executives. See which one they think is sexiest. (After all, which one is a preppy black cube with voicemail?) >Is there another major group I'm forgetting (remember, Universities >don't really count, they get such a big discount). They do count! In my opinion, Sun wouldn't have made it to where it is today without the interest (and dollars) of universities. >So in general, the Next seems to be not powerful enough for the scientific >community, and too expensive for everbody else. I don't think the scientific community is the target market. As far as expense goes, what isn't expensive at first run? It's not fair to judge it this way, in my opinion, for at least two more years. Thanks for your comments and ideas, though! I don't mean to argue, just want to provide an alternate viewpoint. //=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\\ || Larry J. Hughes, Senior Programmer || hughes@silver.bacs.indiana.edu || || Indiana University || || || University Computing Services || "The person who knows everything || || 750 N. State Road 46 Bypass || has a lot to learn." || || Bloomington, IN 47405 || || || (812) 855-9255 || Disclaimer: See quote above. || \\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=//
kim@swbatl.UUCP (5605) (11/23/89)
In article <30217@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>, hughes@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (larry hughes) writes: > In article <4283@helios.ee.lbl.gov> tierney@lbl-csam.arpa (Brian Tierney [SFSU Computer Science Dept]) writes: > > > >Second, why Joe average will never buy one: > > It's too damn expensive, and a $1000 AT clone run's all the > >software he needs. > > Today. Not tomorrow. In the early 80's, people were saying "Why > by an IBM PC, when my C/PM system runs all the software I need?" > > >Third, the business community: > > Here, I'm not sure, but it seems most company's would rather spend > >$4000 for a 386 machine running Xenix and an 80M drive than $10,000 > >for a Next with a 330M drive. We'll see... > > I don't agree...give a dog and pony show of a NeXT and a '386/Xenix > machine to a team of high executives. See which one they think is > sexiest. (After all, which one is a preppy black cube with voicemail?) > > >Is there another major group I'm forgetting (remember, Universities > >don't really count, they get such a big discount). > > They do count! In my opinion, Sun wouldn't have made it to where it is > today without the interest (and dollars) of universities. > > >So in general, the Next seems to be not powerful enough for the scientific > >community, and too expensive for everbody else. > > I don't think the scientific community is the target market. As far > as expense goes, what isn't expensive at first run? It's not fair > to judge it this way, in my opinion, for at least two more years. > > Thanks for your comments and ideas, though! I don't mean to argue, > just want to provide an alternate viewpoint. > > //=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=\\ > || Larry J. Hughes, Senior Programmer || hughes@silver.bacs.indiana.edu || > || Indiana University || || > || University Computing Services || "The person who knows everything || > || 750 N. State Road 46 Bypass || has a lot to learn." || > || Bloomington, IN 47405 || || > || (812) 855-9255 || Disclaimer: See quote above. || > \\=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=// I couldn't resist this line of conversation. I run a graphic arts shop with 21 MacIIcx's using primarily desktop publishing and pre-press software packages. (We provide most of the employee information newsletter support, internal business presentation slides, and a smattering of 2 to 4 color advertising pieces to a five state region.) My corporate environment is rapidly moving to Unix as a standard. I have to have a mechanized device which a designer can use as a tool. Note: Designer, not a programmer. So, this is what I need: a) A high power desktop/media presentation device which will allow me to migrate into the new media arenas of desktop video and hypermedia, complete with MacIntosh-like user interface. (designers have a very understandable mental block against MSDOS) b) A "generic" operating system: i.e.UNIX. c) Machine which will run faster. d) Machine which will run all of the emerging prepress and visual system software. Now, price is not the hot issues here, as I'm already throwing 8,000 to 9,000 dollars at each Mac right now. So, in summary: +MacType interface. +Unix +Desktop Media. +Priced competitely between $8,000-$10,000 Sounds like NEXT to me. K Gordon - "but then what do I know?" w: -- Kim W. Gordon - SWBT - Graphics / Media One Bell Center - 7th Floor Graphics Center - St. Louis. MO. 63101. UUCP: { pyramid, uunet, bellcore }...!swbatl!kim PHON: 314-235-5605 FAX: 314-235-5609
daveh@cbmvax.UUCP (Dave Haynie) (11/23/89)
in article <4283@helios.ee.lbl.gov>, tierney@lbl-csam.arpa (Brian Tierney [SFSU Computer Science Dept]) says: > For about the same price as a Next, I get this with a SparcStation > (true, it's a diskless node, and disks are expensive, but you get the > point). SparcStations use the same old SCSI drives that everyone else uses these days. The SparcStations we have around here each have 2 100 meg Quantum drives. Not cheap as compared to the run of the mill (eg, slow) 40 meg ST-506 drives for your PC-AT, but certainly well within the realm of the normal personal computer owner budget (we use various Quantums in Amigas). I'd expect the NeXT could use 'em as well. > | Brian Tierney, Computer Graphics Lab | internet: tierney@george.lbl.gov | -- Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Systems Engineering) "The Crew That Never Rests" {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh PLINK: hazy BIX: hazy Too much of everything is just enough
mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu (11/24/89)
>> >>Second, why Joe average will never buy one: >> It's too damn expensive, and a $1000 AT clone run's all the >>software he needs. >Today. Not tomorrow. In the early 80's, people were saying "Why >by an IBM PC, when my C/PM system runs all the software I need?" This is not a fair comparison. A CPM system ran on the Z-80 (I believe). It never migrated to more powerful chips (well, it did, but people seemed to buy MS-DOS instead - the CPM86 wouldn't run CPM binaries). MS-DOS has migrated to 386 and 486 CPU's. A cheap 386 clone has MORE power than a NeXt. Substantially more, for less money. NeXt has to make their mark on spiffiness, by out MACing Apple with a real multitasking OS. And, please don't use the argument "I can use a diskless workstation". Nobody - nobody - is going to make lots of sales of diskless workstations. In ten years nobody - nobody - is going to make sales of diskless electric mixers (and that is a serious prediction!). "Lots of sales" implies selling single machines for stand-alone use. I looked at the NeXt and was highly impressed, except for the lack of color and the woeful lack of horsepower. I was impressed by the MAC too, when it first came out, and the Lisa before that. But I never have bought one. They are too frustrating. Everything is canned. Too menu-driven. Too many things you "can't do". Just yesterday I was looking at scanner software on one. The scanner was attached, the program loaded, but the "scan" item on the menu was grayed. NEither I nor the gurus had any idea why. The manual was useless. Hopefully vendors of add-ons for the NeXt will provide enough data on their products that an owner can write ordinary Unix programs to access them. HAving a real OS and being able to write ordinary command line programs is a big help. Doug MCDonald
UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer) (11/24/89)
Comparing Sparcs to NeXTs on price alone won't work unless you create
similar software configurations. An at that, I don't think you can
get as much software for the Sparc if you adhere to NeXTs strategy that
it be well integrated and offer a consistent interface.
Take one example, the relational database server. On the NeXT, developers
are *supposed* to realize tat every box will have a database server, and
therefore *use* it to manage the application's data. If developers do this
then it becaomes very easy for future applications to access any application's
data (if authorized, of course).
In fact, I haven't seen this happen yet, but I can imagine it. Suppose the
Email software used the DB server to keep track of the incoming mail,
sender, size in bytes, date of arrival, and so on. The, if an adminstrator
wanted to query the behavior of the email system, any machine on the
network could easily be used to create a query, e.g. how much mail is being
sent to Joe might be something like Select sum(msgsize) sendername From
Maillog@joe group by sendername sort by sum(msgsize).
Better yet, if a SPREADSHEET needed the data, it could send the query.
You have noticed that the spreadsheet promised comes from an important
database company, haven't you.
leenick@toro.UUCP (Nicholas Jacobs) (11/25/89)
In article <245300021@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> mcdonald@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu writes: > >And, please don't use the argument "I can use a diskless workstation". >Nobody - nobody - is going to make lots of sales of diskless >workstations. In ten years nobody - nobody - is going to make sales >of diskless electric mixers (and that is a serious prediction!). >"Lots of sales" implies selling single machines for stand-alone use. > >Doug MCDonald Let me preface with the comment that we do not yet own any of the NeXT machines... But in fact, diskless workstations are very useful, regardless of the vendor. We have several regional offices (i.e., they are far away from NYC) and the ability to update software (including system updates) remotely is very important. It takes far less time to update one or two servers and let the other machines boot off them and run application software. I do agree that having a small local disk for swap is very useful, but many of our users are not interested in using the machine on their desk for any- thing but the applications we supply. I think that "Lots of sales" implies large organizations like the U.S Gov't and Fortune 500 corp's buying machines, and these groups more and more are requiring that they can cost-effectively network and maintain these machines. Just my $0.02... Nicholas Jacobs +-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------+ | UUCP: uunet!toro!nick | Internet: nick@toro.uu.net | AT&T: (212) 236-3230 | +-----------------------+----------------------------+----------------------+ "Disclaimer? The legal fees are probably more than my annual salary..."
mikes@NCoast.ORG (Mike Squires) (11/26/89)
In article <30217@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> hughes@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (larry hughes) writes: > >I don't agree...give a dog and pony show of a NeXT and a '386/Xenix >machine to a team of high executives. See which one they think is >sexiest. (After all, which one is a preppy black cube with voicemail?) > I think the real competition for the NeXT (or Sun, for that matter) is a 486 box running either SCO UNIX V 3.2 or Interactive 386/ix. I have a copy of SCO UNIX V 3.2 and it has X11, NFS, TCP/IP, Motif. SCO is selling a package that will run mutiple 486 CPUs in parallel - and a 486 is 20,000 Dhrystones/sec, not 4000. Entry level 486 boxes will be selling for $5000 list (it's actually cheaper to build a 486 than a 386, fewer glue chips needed). When 486 production ramps up at the end of '90 the market will be very interesting. For some real data, take a look at MIPS magazine; they seem to be doing a good job of looking at the new 386/486 hardware as well as systems like the NeXT, DECstation 3100/2100, etc. Michael L. Squires uucp: {necntc,cwjcc,hoptoad}!ncoast!peng!sir-alan!mikes 752 Chestnut Street ..!{pitt,uunet!convex,uunet}!sir-alan!mikes Meadville, PA 16335 BITNET: mikes%sir-alan@pitt.UUCP (VAX) Voice: 814 337 5528 MIKES AT SIR-ALAN!PITT.UUCP (IBM) Data: 814 337 0348 Internet: sir-alan!mikes@uunet.uu.net login of "ubbs" for BBS sir-alan!mikes@vax.cs.pittsburgh.edu
sharon@asylum.SF.CA.US (Sharon Fisher) (11/27/89)
In article <1989Nov26.041027.24776@NCoast.ORG> mikes@ncoast.ORG (Mike Squires) writes: >For some real data, take a look at MIPS magazine; they seem to be doing >a good job of looking at the new 386/486 hardware as well as systems like >the NeXT, DECstation 3100/2100, etc. MIPS announced a couple of weeks ago that they're changing their name to Personal Workstation. I'm not sure when this is taking effect. The magazine is put out by M&T.
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (11/27/89)
If you need more ram, take 4Mbyte SIMM's they are costly, but if you need ram, then you have to pay... Anyway, you can then plug up to 64MB RAM on the mainboard. Is this enough? 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@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (11/27/89)
>I think the real competition for the NeXT (or Sun, for that matter) is >a 486 box running either SCO UNIX V 3.2 or Interactive 386/ix. You should not compare things that exist and such that don't. A fair comparison, in a time when 486 have BUGS, is a 386. If you want to compare the nonexisting 486-market with the NeXT then compare it with the next NeXT: 68040, DSP, multiprocessing (MACH) etc. 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
kevin@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu (Kevin Harris) (11/27/89)
First, why I would never buy one: .......[deleted] Third, the business community: Here, I'm not sure, but it seems most company's would rather spend $4000 for a 386 machine running Xenix and an 80M drive than $10,000 for a Next with a 330M drive. We'll see... I don't know about this one. 8Megs of memory and 256Megs of disk are *not* something to be sneezed at in terms of cost. Then ya gotta add Xenix/Sys V-386/another variation of u__x. I think that by the time you buy the 386 machine and add all the stuff that comes standard on a NeXT, you're looking at closer to $10,000 than $4,000 and even then, you're looking at mix-'n-match components and not a system that was designed as a whole, cohesive unit (ie. a workstation.) Of course, I'm rather biased, I *really* like the NeXT. |-> ..... [remainder of message deleted]
jtn@zodiac.ADS.COM (John Nelson) (11/28/89)
In article <977@swbatl.UUCP> kim@swbatl.UUCP (5605) writes: > >I couldn't resist this line of conversation... >So, this is what I need: >b) A "generic" operating system: >i.e.UNIX. > >c) Machine which will run faster. > >d) Machine which will run all of the >emerging prepress and visual system >software. >Sounds like NEXT to me. I wasn't aware that NeXT provided as many tools for prepress and visual systems as the Mac. I guess my point is that YES, NeXT runs Unix and some really nice software, but it doesn't runthe wide range of packages that the Mac does. Third-party support takes time. I'm currently making a similar decision. I need a machine that will support music applications. The NeXT hardware was tailor made for musicians but wait a minute... where's the sequencers? Where's the notation packages? Where'is the editor/librarians etc etc. Sure, NeXT has music and sound objects that will let you write that stuff ... but nobody has written it yet. Thus the Mac wins for existing software and functionality even though it lags in sexy hardware. John T. Nelson UUCP: sun!sundc!potomac!jtn Advanced Decision Systems Internet: jtn@potomac.ads.com 1500 Wilson Blvd #512; Arlington, VA 22209-2401 (703) 243-1611
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (11/28/89)
In article <4283@helios.ee.lbl.gov> tierney@lbl-csam.arpa (Brian Tierney [SFSU Computer Science Dept]) writes: > >I have a Next in the same office where I work, and I've used it some, >and think it's a really great machine. But the question occurs to me, >who will actually spend money on this machine? Who are they marketing >this thing for? They can't possibly expect to make much money on the >University market alone. > >First, why I would never buy one: > I need (and have on my Sun SPARCstation) AT LEAST 30M of ram and > a 12 MIP machine. I also need to be able to run X windows. For about >the same price as a Next, I get this with a SparcStation (true, it's a >diskless node, and disks are expensive, but you get the point). >And to any scientists out there who say 'I don't need 30M of RAM or >X windows', just a 1-2 years, you will. > > >Is there another major group I'm forgetting (remember, Universities >don't really count, they get such a big discount). > >So in general, the Next seems to be not powerful enough for the scientific >community, and too expensive for everbody else. You asked for comments, so here goes. I don't know if I'd call it a "major" group, but there's those of us who want *FAST* machines, loads of RAM, and lots of disk space. 16 meg of RAM just won't cut it (load the other three slots in the cube with RAM, and you might have something). 330 meg of disk is nice, but I don't want to have to backup to the floptical drive. And I want more than 330M of disk, too. I want color, but not to have every window come up in an eye-popping rainbow. I want to have the screen in grayscale, with error messages in red. The "mail has arrived" flag should come up in blue. Only the "unusual" events need to be in color (on my machine, anyway). With a system that is mono-only (at this time), I don't even have the option. Next, how the heck do I get software into the machine? Don't tell me to download, then uncompress it, then print the manual (or wait a few days for it to arrive FedEx). No, a floptical cartridge is gonna be wasted for a program or dataset of less than a few hundred K (esp. at $25 to $50 a cartridge). I want to be able to walk into my friendly NeXT store, pick up a box, and take home a real software package. That includes a real manual. Same with mailorder; I don't want to have to dial a 1-800 number to spend hours downloading something. How do you attach peripherals to the cube? Sure it's got those neat ports on the back, but attach one extra gadget, and *blam* that sleek black space-age minimalist design goes down the tubes (sort of like comparing the original plain Mac to the things we've got now). And I want a keyboard I can put in my lap; the daisy-chain is neat, but not user-friendly to me. I've been diddling with computers since my first TRS-80 Model I back in Oct. 1979. Remember 4K of RAM, tape (audio cassette) storage, and a BASIC with two string variables (good ol' A$ and B$)? I've played with lots of good stuff since then, and some of it actually would be useful. Right now a Sun would be my best bet (maybe an SGI or Apollo, but you get the idea). I'm not going to pay many thousands for a machine that doesn't do what I want. Right now, the NeXT doesn't do what I want. Yeah, so maybe I'm stubborn, and NeXT is a new company, and the next generation of the NeXT will be better (of course, when that next generation comes along, Sun, HP/Apollo, et al will already have machines on the market as competition). Thanks for reading. Bob
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (11/28/89)
In article <21599@brunix.UUCP> rca@cslab5g.UUCP (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: >If you need more ram, take 4Mbyte SIMM's they are costly, but >if you need ram, then you have to pay... >Anyway, you can then plug up to 64MB RAM on the mainboard. >Is this enough? No, esp. not if a multiprocessor system comes out for the machine. For some things, there is *never* too much RAM, **never**. I've seen some impressive stuff done in <64K, but that was back in the days of 8 bit processors, $1000 for a 5 Meg hard drive, and 300 baud modems. How much RAM will the 24/32 bit color cube require just to wake itself up (assuming the 24/32 bit color system hits the market anywhere near the rumored "early next year"...NeXT has been good about it so far, but the vaporware demons lurk in the most innocent of corporations. Gottdam I hate vaporware...)? Bob
fellman@celece.ucsd.edu (Ronald Fellman) (11/28/89)
In article <1989Nov26.041027.24776@NCoast.ORG> mikes@ncoast.ORG (Mike Squires) writes: >I think the real competition for the NeXT (or Sun, for that matter) is >a 486 box running either SCO UNIX V 3.2 or Interactive 386/ix. I have >a copy of SCO UNIX V 3.2 and it has X11, NFS, TCP/IP, Motif. SCO is >selling a package that will run mutiple 486 CPUs in parallel - and a >486 is 20,000 Dhrystones/sec, not 4000. Entry level 486 boxes will I just learned that a 68040 microprocessor running at the same speed as a 68030 is apparently more than THREE TIMES FASTER than the 68030. When (if?) NeXT comes out with the '040 CPU board (this Spring?) they won't have to worry to much about the '486. It will also support mutiple CPUs and has a built in floating-point unit which is much faster than the 68882. -ron fellman (rfellman@ucsd.edu)
mfi@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Mark Interrante) (11/29/89)
In article <7520@sdcsvax.UCSD.Edu> rfellman@ucsd.edu (Ronald Fellman) writes: >In article <1989Nov26.041027.24776@NCoast.ORG> mikes@ncoast.ORG (Mike Squires) writes: >>I think the real competition for the NeXT (or Sun, for that matter) is >>a 486 box running either SCO UNIX V 3.2 or Interactive 386/ix. I have >>a copy of SCO UNIX V 3.2 and it has X11, NFS, TCP/IP, Motif. SCO is >>selling a package that will run mutiple 486 CPUs in parallel - and a >>486 is 20,000 Dhrystones/sec, not 4000. Entry level 486 boxes will > >I just learned that a 68040 microprocessor running at the same speed as >a 68030 is apparently more than THREE TIMES FASTER than the 68030. When (if?) >NeXT comes out with the '040 CPU board (this Spring?) they won't have to worry >to much about the '486. It will also support mutiple CPUs and has >a built in floating-point unit which is much faster than the 68882. Does anyone KNOW what the status of the 040 is? is it in engineering samples? when is the expected volume release date? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Interrante Software Engineering Research Center mfi@beach.cis.ufl.edu CIS Department, University of Florida 32611 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "X is just raster-op on wheels" - Bill Joy, January 1987
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (11/29/89)
>I don't know if I'd call it a "major" group, but there's those of us >who want *FAST* machines, loads of RAM, and lots of disk space. >16 meg of RAM just won't cut it (load the other three slots in the cube >with RAM, and you might have something). 330 meg of disk is nice, >but I don't want to have to backup to the floptical drive. And I want >more than 330M of disk, too. I wonder how much you know about the machine, that you write this! You can have 64MB of Ram without using up any of the 3 free slots, you can have an internal 660MB drive (try do have this in a pizza-box i.e. SPARCstation) and if this is not enough then you can have a server or external drives, so where is the problem with storage? If you want a tape backup, so buy an exabyte. Or do you want to buy everything from the same company? Well, then NeXT does not make digitizers, keyboard-coverst, kitchen-sinks (well, nor does any other reasonable company: they should do what they are good in...) When it comes to color or speed, then it is a question of price. Compare the NeXT with the SUN 3/80 not with the SPARC. Color is coming pretty soon, 32-bit color (24-bit color, 8-bit transparency) and no braindamaged 8-bit stuff. Then get photorealism on the desktop. Color enough? By the way, these ppl who need that much memory must be VERY few or bad programmers. Here at Brown, most of the advanced research is done on SPARCstations with only 12MB of RAM! >How do you attach peripherals to the cube? Sure it's got those neat >ports on the back, but attach one extra gadget, and *blam* that >sleek black space-age minimalist design goes down the tubes (sort of >like comparing the original plain Mac to the things we've got now). Well, if SCSI, Ethernet and NUBUS-slots are not enough, what please would you like to see? What does a SUN have in addition to that? >And I want a keyboard I can put in my lap; the daisy-chain is neat, >but not user-friendly to me. Althogh I understand you very well in this point, most ppl still work on the desk, but it is probably not too difficult to make some longer connection to the mouse.days for it to arrive FedEx). >No, a floptical cartridge is gonna be >wasted for a program or dataset of less than a few hundred K (esp. >at $25 to $50 a cartridge). I want to be able to walk into my friendly You were talking about storage, here you got it! Maybe you want to store certain applications with the data that belongs to it, maybe there are other reasons you want to have the space for. But at least you get some REAL value along with the Software. Usually you have all these nice color boxes and cases, tons of leaflets and stuff like that. Have you ever installed UNIXsoftware form diskettes? I did, and I never want to do this again. And if you think of tapes, how much cheaper are they? Finally there is still the possibility to lend the optical disk, and send it back after installations, this is less hassle than diskettes... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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@cogsci.bitnet
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (11/29/89)
>No, esp. not if a multiprocessor system comes out for the machine. >For some things, there is *never* too much RAM, **never**. Well, I hope that you will be able to put 64MB on each of the processorboards. Would mean 4 processors, and 256MB RAM. The quantity of RAM should be in some relation to the throuput of a system. I think for a 68030 64MB are enough. When there are faster processors, there will also be more RAM (64Mbit-chips) The same is hopefully true for the color NeXT. (Enough memory to cache the image...) >Gottdam I hate vaporware...)? Me too, but NeXT did not officially announce the new NeXT. They did however tell at the developer camp that at least a color board will be announced in first quarter 1990. Ron ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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@cogsci.bitnet
epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) (11/29/89)
In article <21301@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) writes: >I've been diddling with computers since my first TRS-80 Model I >back in Oct. 1979. Remember 4K of RAM, tape (audio cassette) storage, >Right now, the NeXT doesn't do what I want. Ok... There's a "microphone" jack on the back of the MegaPixel. It can't be that hard to hack together something to read from a cassette tape. After all, even the "modern" IBM PCs (ca. 1984) had cassette ports. There you go--low-cost distribution media, and no peripherals to buy--EVERYONE has a Walkman(tm). You don't really care how long it takes to transfer since you only have to do it once. I really amaze myself sometimes. :-) -=EPS=- -- space filler
twl@brunix (Ted "Theodore" (W) Leung) (11/30/89)
In article <21736@brunix.UUCP> rca@cslab9g.UUCP (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: >By the way, these ppl who need that much memory must be VERY few or >bad programmers. Here at Brown, most of the advanced research is done >on SPARCstations with only 12MB of RAM! > Unfortunately, this is not quite true. All of the machines being used for AI research have 16MB of memory, and more would be nice. People in my own group (object-oriented database) would like 16-32MB of real memory to use for data buffers or things like that. It's not just code that takes up space! The experimental ML compiler that I'm hacking on right now has a virtual memory image of at last 4-5MB, so after you take out 1-2 MB of RAM for UNIX and 3 MB for X/NeWS and another 2-5 MB for windows and GNU Emacs, 12MB can be a tight squeeze! I'd be all for a 25+MIP machine with >32MB of physical memory..... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet/CSnet: twl@cs.brown.edu | Ted "Theodore" Leung BITNET: twl@BROWNCS.BITNET | Box 1910, Brown University UUCP: uunet!brunix!twl | Providence, RI 02912
ron@woan.austin.ibm.com (Ronald S. Woan) (11/30/89)
In article <21603@brunix.UUCP>, rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: > You should not compare things that exist and such that don't. > A fair comparison, in a time when 486 have BUGS, is a 386. > If you want to compare the nonexisting 486-market with the NeXT > then compare it with the next NeXT: 68040, DSP, multiprocessing > (MACH) etc. This is quite unfair as '486 machines are on the market from at least a half dozen manufacturers and the bugs have long since been corrected. Also comparing at comparable list prices, '486 systems and 33MHz '386 systems still have an edge. The Interactive UNIX for '386 machines is very nice along with their X-Windows support and AIX/PS2 is pretty spiffy as well. With a list in the 10K range, you should probably be comparing the NeXT to the Sparcstation 1, DECSTATION 3100, and Data General AViiON machines; all of which (especially the latter) can run circles around the NeXT box. Remeber, a DSP adapter is only ~$1000 even for an IBM-AT. NeXT has got to come out with a better box next year and drop the price (list) if it expects to compete in the commercial market against the RISC boxes. Color would be nice too. Ron +-----All Views Expressed Are My Own And Are Not Necessarily Shared By------+ +------------------------------My Employer----------------------------------+ + Ronald S. Woan (IBM VNET)WOAN AT AUSTIN, (AUSTIN)ron@woan.austin.ibm.com + + outside of IBM @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron + + last resort woan@peyote.cactus.org +
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (11/30/89)
In article <802@wet.UUCP> epsilon@wet.UUCP (Eric P. Scott) writes: |In article <21301@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) writes: |>I've been diddling with computers since my first TRS-80 Model I |>back in Oct. 1979. Remember 4K of RAM, tape (audio cassette) storage, | |>Right now, the NeXT doesn't do what I want. | |Ok... There's a "microphone" jack on the back of the MegaPixel. |It can't be that hard to hack together something to read from |a cassette tape. After all, even the "modern" IBM PCs (ca. 1984) |had cassette ports. There you go--low-cost distribution media, |and no peripherals to buy--EVERYONE has a Walkman(tm). You don't |really care how long it takes to transfer since you only have to |do it once. |> |I really amaze myself sometimes. :-) Hey, great idea! But I *do* care how long it takes. Y'see, I also remember tapping my foot, watching the little asterisks in the upper- right corner blinking with every 500 bytes or so that came in. Every once in a while, after waiting for a five-minute load, the last couple of K would get fouled (bad volume setting, dirty tape head, etc), and I'd have to go back and redo the whole bloomin' thing. Anoher five minutes, and sometimes *that* would blow up too. My preference for low-cost distribution medium would be 1/4" tape, or maybe DAT (though the drives for both are costly; but hey, the cube has a multi-thousand-dollar floptical, so what's another few thou ? :). Also, any peripheral (even a little Walkman) adds to the clutter of stuff on the desk, which the "pure" NeXT would avoid. I'd like to see some of that front panel space used for a tape system of some kind. Bob
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (11/30/89)
In article <21736@brunix.UUCP> rca@cslab9g.UUCP (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: >I wonder how much you know about the machine, that you write this! I know what I've gotten from the Next-sized brochure they made available via the UF computer demo room, and from a good corss-section of the computer press (Byte, PC Computing, et al). >You can have 64MB of Ram without using up any of the 3 free slots, I know that, but 64 M just ain't gonna be enough. After the op system, the windowing/GUI system, all the hardware management software (drivers, scanner controllers, etc), 64 M will leave enough for some applications. Forget the data those apps will require and/or generate. >you can have an internal 660MB drive (try do have this in a pizza-box > i.e. SPARCstation) and if this is not enough then you can have a >server or external drives, so where is the problem with storage? And I know the cube can hold the 660MB drive (that's in the brochure :). I'm not looking at a SPARCstation either; I'm talking about floor models here, for handling 1.7GB drives, and the backup system. The problem with going to a server or external drives is that, considering the way the cube is so lovingly futuro-designed, any attachments are going to look more than a bit kludgy. Other than that, external drives are cool by me. Actually, if Next would make external drives in a cube chassis, or something that looked like a cube, or if they made the chassis (just the magnesium case, not the power supply, drives, board, etc) available to outside drive manufacturers, I'd be happy. Then I could stack the cubes, or, if I had eight cubes, build them into a *big* cube :). >If you want a tape backup, so buy an exabyte. Or do you want to buy >everything from the same company? Well, then NeXT does not make >digitizers, keyboard-coverst, kitchen-sinks (well, nor does any other >reasonable company: they should do what they are good in...) I'm willing to buy an exabyte, but see the above comments on the aesthetics of the situation. Hey, if I'm spending 10 to 15 thou on hardware, I want it to look decent (even hyper hardware manufacturers realize that; consider that Cray machines are furnished in the customer's choice of fabric covering). I have no driving need or want to buy all my stuff from the same company. In fact, 400 dpi from the Next printer isn't really up to snuff, but I can't get a Next-compatible 600 dpi printer (that I know of anyway) and be able to take advantage of Display PostScript. I agree, companies should do what they are good at; so why does Next figure it should be the only way to go for getting a printer? >When it comes to color or speed, then it is a question of price. >Compare the NeXT with the SUN 3/80 not with the SPARC. >Color is coming pretty soon, 32-bit color (24-bit color, 8-bit >transparency) and no braindamaged 8-bit stuff. Then get photorealism >on the desktop. Color enough? Yeah, that's color enough. Even though most of the time I only want color for the error messages, annunciators, etc, there are times when 32 bit color will be very nice, if not outright necessary. >By the way, these ppl who need that much memory must be VERY few or >bad programmers. Here at Brown, most of the advanced research is done >on SPARCstations with only 12MB of RAM! Well, I guess I'm in the very few ("The few, the proud, the memory guzzlers. Be all you can be. It's not just a program, it's an adventure."). I don't even do all that much programming; even commerally-available software can take up gobs of RAM, and, once again, the data going in and out of those programs (esp. for image processing) is probably going to take more room than the program itself. >>How do you attach peripherals to the cube? Sure it's got those neat >>ports on the back, but attach one extra gadget, and *blam* that >>sleek black space-age minimalist design goes down the tubes (sort of >>like comparing the original plain Mac to the things we've got now). > >Well, if SCSI, Ethernet and NUBUS-slots are not enough, what please >would you like to see? What does a SUN have in addition to that? Nonono, you've misunderstood. Though, the way I phrased it, I can see how. By "how" I don't mean the interfaces available; SCSI, Ethernet, and NuBus are fine there. What I referred to (again; please don't think I have a fetish for tidy system design) is the fact that peripherals hanging off the back are going to break up "the Look" of the system. Besides that, if the cube is sitting 3 meters away, any attachments you might want sitting next to the display are going to have to have 3 meter cables (unless they get daisy-chained too), and the rat's nest of wire grows. >>And I want a keyboard I can put in my lap; the daisy-chain is neat, >>but not user-friendly to me. >Althogh I understand you very well in this point, most ppl still work >on the desk, but it is probably not too difficult to make some longer >connection to the mouse.days for it to arrive FedEx). Hmmm...*real* hardware hacking. I kinda like that, actually. Too bad Heathkit won't have Nexten in kit form :). >>No, a floptical cartridge is gonna be >>wasted for a program or dataset of less than a few hundred K (esp. >>at $25 to $50 a cartridge). I want to be able to walk into my friendly >You were talking about storage, here you got it! Maybe you want to >store certain applications with the data that belongs to it, maybe >there are other reasons you want to have the space for. But at least >you get some REAL value along with the Software. Usually you have all >these nice color boxes and cases, tons of leaflets and stuff like >that. Have you ever installed UNIXsoftware form diskettes? I did, and >I never want to do this again. And if you think of tapes, how much >cheaper are they? My handy-dandy Inmac catalog has DC2000 compatible tapes for $23.35 in quantities of 5 or less (and Inmac is hardly a price leader in computer supplies). I know tapes don't hold as much (around 40 MB), but it's a closer fit to the size of programs (and some datasets). >Finally there is still the possibility to lend the optical disk, and >send it back after installations, this is less hassle than >diskettes... I thought about that, and it just might work. Given sufficient hard drive space, all you'd need would be one or two flopticals to use when carrying stuff from one place to another (just leave all the other stuff on the fixed drive system). >"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@cogsci.bitnet Damn good quote! I like people to be unreasonable. That's the only way Apple "opened up" the Mac (though, hehe, at cost to the aesthetics of the system), and it's going to be the way to get Next to give us what we want. Bob
dtgcube (Edward Jung) (11/30/89)
It is possible, in theory, to implement a 19.2k baud modem on the NeXT machine
using the DSP and some relatively cheap hardware. I heard at the developer camp
that original versions of the Cube has this hardware. Apparently it was removed
because it violated import regulations in certain countries where telephone
equipment is regulated.
I have looked around for source to implement such a thing, but have had no luck.
I suspect that NeXT has code laying around somewhere (?).
A Trailblazer 2 is expensive (but nice!); the roughly 14+k throughput, however,
makes for a reasonable medium of data exchange for moderate sized files (say,
in the low-megabytes range). It's also faster than mail-order.
--
Edward Jung The Deep Thought Group, L.P.
BIX: ejung 3400 Swede Hill Road
NeXT or UNIX mail Clinton, WA. 98236
UUCP: uunet!dtgcube!ed Internet: ed@dtg.comdennis@yang.cpac.washington.edu (Dennis Gentry) (11/30/89)
In article <21736@brunix.UUCP> rca@cslab9g.UUCP (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: >By the way, these ppl who need that much memory must be VERY few or >bad programmers. Here at Brown, most of the advanced research is done >on SPARCstations with only 12MB of RAM! > Unfortunately, this is not quite true. All of the machines being used for AI research have 16MB of memory, and more would be nice. People in my own group (object-oriented database) would like 16-32MB of real memory to use for data buffers or things like that. It's not just code that takes up space! The experimental ML compiler that I'm hacking on right now has a virtual memory image of at last 4-5MB, so after you take out 1-2 MB of RAM for UNIX and 3 MB for X/NeWS and another 2-5 MB for windows and GNU Emacs, 12MB can be a tight squeeze! I'd be all for a 25+MIP machine with >32MB of physical memory..... Just to make sure that we're all clear on this point: You *can install 64Mb of RAM in a NeXT today* using 4Mb DRAMs, which are either available from NeXT or which will soon be available from NeXT. You can also find them in the back of MacWeek. It's not clear that 64Mb is really a reasonable amount of RAM for a 68030. Even though 64Mb costs twice as much as 32Mb, the performance gain you'll achieve by going from 32Mb to 64Mb will almost certainly be less impressive than the performance gain from 16 to 32Mb. Dennis Gentry (speaking strictly for myself)
sharon@asylum.SF.CA.US (Sharon Fisher) (12/01/89)
In article <1028@awdprime.UUCP> @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron writes: >In article <21603@brunix.UUCP>, rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: >> You should not compare things that exist and such that don't. >> A fair comparison, in a time when 486 have BUGS, is a 386. >This is quite unfair as '486 machines are on the market from at least >a half dozen manufacturers and the bugs have long since been >corrected. I believe he's referring to bugs that were recently found within the 486 chip itself. Having 486 boxes from other manufacturers doesn't help in that case.
rogerj@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Roger Jagoda) (12/01/89)
In article <DENNIS.89Nov30030153@yang.cpac.washington.edu> dennis@yang.cpac.washington.edu (Dennis Gentry) writes: > > I'd be all for a 25+MIP machine with >32MB of physical memory..... > >Just to make sure that we're all clear on this point: You *can >install 64Mb of RAM in a NeXT today* using 4Mb DRAMs, which are >either available from NeXT or which will soon be available from >NeXT. You can also find them in the back of MacWeek. Lets all be sure we're right on this one. As a test, our group bought 20 4 MB SIMM boards from the Chip Merchant. They worked fine in a MACIIci (030, 25Mhz) but the Cube froze up solid and refused to boot. We tried all the possibilities: All banks with 4MB boards The first half with 4s and the second with 1s The first half with 1s and the second with 4s Both of the above with varying 4 and 8MB sections Nothing revealing could be found in /usr/adm/messages. These guys were 80ns, page mode (nibble mode not avail.) So I have to report one failure under the above circs. So has anyone else tried it and gotten it to work? Is there any point to it? I mean do you notice Mathm. running better or less swapping? I mean with an 030, and even with Mach's memory handler (which is upposed to be on the better side as far as UNIX kernels go) how much can we push this Cube??? > >It's not clear that 64Mb is really a reasonable amount of RAM >for a 68030. Even though 64Mb costs twice as much as 32Mb, the >performance gain you'll achieve by going from 32Mb to 64Mb will >almost certainly be less impressive than the performance gain >from 16 to 32Mb. > Ah, my point here exactly. Uhm, why is this. Is this a kernel limitation or a Cube/hardware limitation? Again, can a 030 UNIX box handle anything more than 16-32MB at 25Mhz? Food for though would be "well, not with one processor but with two..." So when are those EMBIC chips going to be ready???? Roger Jagoda Cornell University FQOJ@CORNELLA.CIT.CORNELL.EDU
twl@brunix (Ted "Theodore" (W) Leung) (12/01/89)
In article <DENNIS.89Nov30030153@yang.cpac.washington.edu> dennis@yang.cpac.washington.edu (Dennis Gentry) writes: > > I'd be all for a 25+MIP machine with >32MB of physical memory..... > >It's not clear that 64Mb is really a reasonable amount of RAM >for a 68030. Even though 64Mb costs twice as much as 32Mb, the >performance gain you'll achieve by going from 32Mb to 64Mb will >almost certainly be less impressive than the performance gain >from 16 to 32Mb. I wasn't trying to debate the feasibility of installing that much memory in a machine. Our SPARCstations have the same capability to accept the 4MB devices. What I was saying was that for some of the applications that I am running, the code wants to allocate or preallocate sufficiently large amounts of memory that 32+MB of real memory would cut down on the paging substantially, especially when running a number of these large programs concurrently. Ideally, I'd like to be able to load up my set of working applications, get them all into main memory, and page as little as possible. Why is it unclear whether 64MB of memory is reasonable for use with a 68030? I'm not intimately familiar with the details of the architecture, but it seems to me that this is more a function of the operating system and the set of applications that are being run. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet/CSnet: twl@cs.brown.edu | Ted "Theodore" Leung BITNET: twl@BROWNCS.BITNET | Box 1910, Brown University UUCP: uunet!brunix!twl | Providence, RI 02912
hui@joplin.mpr.ca (Michael Hui) (12/01/89)
In article <1989Nov30.101515.2084@uunet!dtgcube> ed@uunet!dtgcube (Edward Jung) writes: > >It is possible, in theory, to implement a 19.2k baud modem on the NeXT machine >using the DSP and some relatively cheap hardware ... [stuff deleted] >I have looked around for source to implement such a thing, >but have had no luck. >I suspect that NeXT has code laying around somewhere (?). I suggest you post this to comp.dsp. Be forewarned though. A project such as this qualifies for a _good_ M.A.Sc. thesis in a prestigious university's Electrical Engineering program. In otherwords, the problem is not at all simple.
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (12/01/89)
>This is quite unfair as '486 machines are on the market from at least >a half dozen manufacturers and the bugs have long since been >corrected. Also comparing at comparable list prices, '486 systems and I'm not talking about the bugs in the 486 machines, but in the 486-chips. I so far have only heared the news from Intel that there are bugs in the xx87-part of the chip, but nothing that these are fixed. Or did this escape my attention ? 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@cogsci.bitnet
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (12/01/89)
>to the clutter of stuff on the desk, which the "pure" NeXT would >avoid. I'd like to see some of that front panel space used for >a tape system of some kind. besides the fact, that there is a tape system for the NeXT on the market, why are you so keen on tapes, when you can have a disk? Tape cartridges are not much cheaper than a disk, so what is the point I'm missing? (Well, the only pain is that the software does not (yet ?) support multi-volume backup.... If this could be added (hint, hint)). 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@cogsci.bitnet
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (12/01/89)
> Actually, if Next would make >external drives in a cube chassis, or something that looked like >a cube, or if they made the chassis (just the magnesium case, not >the power supply, drives, board, etc) available to outside drive >manufacturers, I'd be happy. Then I could stack the cubes, or, >if I had eight cubes, build them into a *big* cube :). Neat idea, they really should do it. Now, do we want cubes of different sizes to build some kind of artsy arrangement, or should they be all the same size? :) >In fact, 400 dpi from the Next printer isn't really up to snuff, but >I can't get a Next-compatible 600 dpi printer (that I know of anyway) >and be able to take advantage of Display PostScript. As far as I know ANY postscript printer should be compatible with the NeXT computer. As I see it, the NeXT printer is a nice printer as a personal printer or for a small net, if you dedicate one cube as print server. The thing is, that for printing you can't use the NeXT extensions to postscript anyway :( e.g. compositing is not possible on the printer. The official reason is that it depends too much on the resolution and other kind of data of the printer to be easily emulated in standard postscript. I would suggest, that NeXT use a printer database for this purpose. Also some other things a bad about compositing: compositing allowas no rotating etc. of the source. The reason here is speed. But I'd rather see a flag to switch between speed and all logical options postscript usually provides. In a few years, speed hopefully is no longer the problem.... 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@cogsci.bitnet
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (12/01/89)
>Why is it unclear whether 64MB of memory is reasonable for use with a >68030? I'm not intimately familiar with the details of the >architecture, but it seems to me that this is more a function of the >operating system and the set of applications that are being run. The reason is the same as why cache speeds up a computer. According to the principle of locality (guess it is called like that in English, I try to translate it from German...) which was stated by von Neumann, a computer tends to work for a certain period of time in the same area of memory. Of course this area moves around in memory. If now the cache- memory or what we are talking about here, the disk-swapper can keep up with the supply of data, then there is not much speed lost with swapping. It is important, however, that the processor finds the data as often as possible in the cache/main-memory. (high hit rate!) This depends, if you are accessing data, which is not by nature in large parts sequential as are programs, on your algorithms. i.e. a merge sort on a huge ammount of data can do better than quicksort, because it accesses data in a pretty sequential way, and so makes the task for the swapper a lot easier. The speed of the processor comes into question, if we look at the speed with which this 'locality-window' moves around. A faster processor means a relatively slower disk, and therefore a heavier impact of swapping on performance. With more memory this can be brought to a new optimum. 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@cogsci.bitnet
osborn@cs.utexas.edu (John Howard Osborn) (12/01/89)
Well, as far as user interfaces go, I just installed Sun's X11/NeWS OpenWindows on the SparcStations at work. After a few hours of playing with it, I don't fear for NeXT anytime soon. :) - John H. Osborn * University of Texas at Austin Comp. Sci. Dept. osborn@cs.utexas.edu * "Love your SysAdmin."
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (12/01/89)
In article <1989Nov30.101515.2084@uunet!dtgcube> ed@uunet!dtgcube (Edward Jung) writes: >It is possible, in theory, to implement a 19.2k baud modem on the NeXT machine >using the DSP and some relatively cheap hardware. [details about the DSP modem deleted] >A Trailblazer 2 is expensive (but nice!); the roughly 14+k throughput, however, >makes for a reasonable medium of data exchange for moderate sized files (say, >in the low-megabytes range). It's also faster than mail-order. And then I could get a news feed to read at home :)! Did I actually read somewhere that the DSP could actually simultaneously carry out modem operations (maybe not at 19.2Kbaud, but even 4800 would be nice) and other functions (math coprocessing, etc)? Bob
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (12/01/89)
In article <21952@brunix.UUCP> rca@cslab7a.UUCP (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: |> Actually, if Next would make |>external drives in a cube chassis, or something that looked like |>a cube, or if they made the chassis (just the magnesium case, not |>the power supply, drives, board, etc) available to outside drive |>manufacturers, I'd be happy. Then I could stack the cubes, or, |>if I had eight cubes, build them into a *big* cube :). >Neat idea, they really should do it. Now, do we want cubes of >different sizes to build some kind of artsy arrangement, or >should they be all the same size? :) Hmmm. On one hand, I'd say all the same size (standard Next 1' cube), for sake of standardization and making the 2-, 3-, and 4-side Next mondocubes (TM). On the other, I'd say different sizes...one 8" on a side, for tape backup, external disk, etc. One 4" on a side, for the parts for teh 19.2Kbaud modem. You get the picture. My office would soon look like a cubist's nightmare done in flat black. Of course, if empty 1' cubes were available, you could just build whatever you wanted into it. I've got it! Have different sizes, and cluster them around the main cube. Then you have a CubeCluster. Sort of like a kid's plastic bricks. I hereby call for the creation of comp.sys.artistic, for the discussion of issues related to the hoped-for cube family from Next and the arrangement of said cubes. NO, DON'T SEND ANY VOTES YET!!! :*) (or, since this *was* about cubes, :*] ). bob
rca@brunix (Ronald C.F. Antony) (12/01/89)
>finds the data as often as possible in the cache/main-memory. >(high hit rate!) This depends, if you are accessing data, which should be 'how' not 'if'--------^ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "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@cogsci.bitnet
mikes@NCoast.ORG (Mike Squires) (12/03/89)
In article <7520@sdcsvax.UCSD.Edu> rfellman@ucsd.edu (Ronald Fellman) writes: >I just learned that a 68040 microprocessor running at the same speed as >a 68030 is apparently more than THREE TIMES FASTER than the 68030. When (if?) >NeXT comes out with the '040 CPU board (this Spring?) they won't have to worry >to much about the '486. It will also support mutiple CPUs and has >a built in floating-point unit which is much faster than the 68882. > A 68040 NeXT will be running at about the same speed as a 486 UNIX box. At that point the sofware base will be the biggest factor. At this point the NeXT has attracted software developers in some areas but not in many others. Those who work in those areas or who rol their own will be happy; those who don't (or can't) will buy something else. If NeXT can get enough developers to port applications to the NeXT, then they'll have succeeded. At this point, in the fields that I have some knowledge (statistics and courseware in the social sciences) there seems to be practically nothing for the NeXT. That is not surprising, as most software for the social sciences (at the undergraduate level) still runs primarily on the Apple II. There is now some stuff for the IBM PC and a little less for the Mac (except that the exciting stuff is on the Mac).
cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) (12/06/89)
How to distribute software.... hmmm that's simple just doit the same way that PC software is distributed, namely on 3.5 inch PC diskettes readable by any PC As you may well know, it is possible to configure an XT with an ethernet adapter for under 1000 dollars.. I mean if you are going to spend 10K in the first place, whats an additional 10%??? I am willing to bet that most people considering a next machine already have a PC or a MacIntosh already... So, just distribute the NeXT programs on PC or Mac disks, then use ether net to copyit to your NeXT machine, whats the problem? /Carl cbenda@unccvax.uncc.edu
pff@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Pablo Fernicola) (12/06/89)
In article <1753@unccvax.UUCP> cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) writes: > >How to distribute software.... hmmm that's simple just doit the >same way that PC software is distributed, namely on 3.5 inch >PC diskettes readable by any PC > >So, just distribute the NeXT programs on PC or Mac disks, then >use ether net to copyit to your NeXT machine, whats the problem? > >/Carl >cbenda@unccvax.uncc.edu I have been told of two ways of distributing software currently in use: 1- They send you the optical disk. Or you send _them_ the optical disk and they send it back with the software (for a lower price). It seems that some allow you to send back the disk that they originally send you for a refund. 2- A software demo that can be converted into the full blown application by entering the right password. Option 1 seems to work okay, but it would really work if the price of media would go down. Option 2 runs into the problem of distribution of the demo programs. Pablo pff@beach.cis.ufl.edu -- pff@beach.cis.ufl.edu - Pablo Fernicola - Machine Intelligence Laboratory - UF IF YOU CARE ENOUGH TO READ SIGNATURES ... I am graduating next year and I am looking for a job. MS/BS EE, my graduate work incorporates OO-DBMS/Graphics/Robotics/AI
rlp@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Bob Powell) (12/07/89)
In article <1753@unccvax.UUCP> cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) writes: >How to distribute software.... hmmm that's simple just doit the >same way that PC software is distributed, namely on 3.5 inch >PC diskettes readable by any PC [ put an Ethernet card in a PC or on a Mac ] >So, just distribute the NeXT programs on PC or Mac disks, then >use ether net to copyit to your NeXT machine, whats the problem? > >/Carl >cbenda@unccvax.uncc.edu I kind of like that idea. It's one I hadn't thought of. Avoids the problem of putting more stuff onto the cube itself (e.g., a floppy drive that's used only for loading software into the cube), and allows use of existing hardware. Wow...actually an elegant way to solve the problem. Bob
judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Peter Judge) (12/09/89)
NeXT has just distributed an information kit to developers. It contains an updated Chapter on Programming the DSP (very short), a fancy brochure outlining software that the Academic developers are working on, and another brochure, equally fancy, detailing a fairly large number of upcoming or presently available commercial software. This may help calm those who are anxious about forthcoming commercial applications (although the proof is in the pudding, as they say). ------------- judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Peter W. Judge) ----------- -- =============================================== judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Peter Judge) ===============================================