amthor@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Geoffrey Amthor) (12/17/89)
Hi. As many of you know, former Apple co-founder Steve Jobs has founded
a new company that has produced an advanced personal computer/workstation
known as the NeXT computer. This computer has been initially targeted at
the university community, with more recent expansion into the mainstream
business market. I won't belabor you with the details, but the NeXT
computer is viewed as important because of its pioneering application
of new technology, an easy interface builder for programmers, and an
advanced bundling of both special hardware and software, making the
"lowest comon denominator" (to which most developers write applications)
rather high. The machine is somewhat controversial, as some are
irritated that yet another standard has reached the marketplace, while
some others believe the NeXT promises more than it delivers. On the
other hand, there is a growing group of NeXT fans who see it as THE
platform for the future.
Fans and flamers alike share one uncertainty, however: Will the NeXT
succeed in the marketplace?
I'm not in a position to answer that question, but I CAN tabulate what
USENET readers think of the NeXT, and summarize that information for
the net.
As a graduate student interested in buying a NeXT, I realize that
part of what holds me up is my ignorance of what *other* people think of
it. My reasoning is this: if most other people aren't even close to
buying, the NeXT will fail; if others are held back by mere (fixable)
technicalities, the NeXT will likely succeed.
Even if you haven't heard of the NeXT, you can help me by at least saying
that. Like any survey, this one will benefit from a high percentage of
returns--please vote! Of course, since returns are voluntary and readers
are preselected by their subscription to USENET, results will be
unscientific. But I am certain they will help me, and I WILL SUMMARIZE
TO THE NET so that everyone else's curiosity can be satisfied.
There are only 10 questions. When multiple choice options are offered,
please select as many as apply--but IN ORDER OF PRIORITY. Feel free to
add whatever comments you wish, but keep in mind that multiple choice
selections are easier to summarize. Also, unless you indicate otherwise,
summaries to the net will be ANONYMOUS, so if you secretly love or hate
the NeXT, you needn't worry about the secret getting out.
PLEASE REPLY BY E-MAIL. Postings will quickly dwarf the net, I may miss
your posting, and I will summarize to the net anyway.
Be assured that I have no affiliation whatsoever with NeXT or Businessland.
Though I am a graduate student at the University of Iowa, this survey
does not represent the interest of UI.
SURVEY:
1. What is your occupation?
2. What computer(s) do you presently own or use regularly? What other
computer(s) do you have actual experience with?
3. What contact have you had with the NeXT computer?
A. Never heard of it
B. Heard it talked about
C. Have seen print ads (name publication)
D. Have read articles about it (name publication)
E. Have seen one in use or in demonstration (where?)
F. Have tried it myself in demo (where?)
G. Have used, or borrowed access to it, for some time
H. Currently own it or have it provided for my own use
I. Other (please specify)
4. How interested are you in purchasing a present or future version of the
NeXT, or having your department acquire one for your use? (Specify
purchase or department acquisition)
A. Not even remotely interested, ever
B. Haven't really though about it
C. Wouldn't rule it out somday
D. Would be interested *if* certain conditions were satisfied
E. Would be *very* interested if certain conditions were satisfied
F. Am literally ready to buy once certain conditions are met
G. Am ready to buy right now
H. Already own or have sufficient access to a NeXT
I. Other (please specify)
5. If you named conditions in (2), which of the following apply? (Please
name only those conditions that are *conditions*, not wish lists.)
A. If I can find the money
B. If the NeXT comes down in price (How much? Off of university or
Businessland prices?)
C. If I can get a hands-on look/feel (demo? rent? 30-day guarantee?)
D. If color arrives
E. If the CPU is upgraded to a 68040 and/or graphics are sped up
F. If the floptical drive is made faster
G. If the floptical drive is doubled in capacity to 512 MB
H. If laser printing can be handled more seamlessly
I. If the NeXT can be better integrated with existing equipment
(name existing equipment)
J. If a 3-1/2" floppy disk drive is bundled
K. If a supplemental operating system runs in emulation or via
co-processor, or if another UNIX variant runs (name the OS or
variant)
L. If a certain software category is filled by a high-quality
application (name category)
M. If a certain software package or language (such as C++) is ported
to the NeXT (name item)
N. If NeXT applications in general reach a critical mass
O. If the NeXTStep interface is improved (name improvement sought)
P. If enough NeXTs are sold to make it a "safe" platform
Q. If a laptop NeXT arrives
R. If a multi-user NeXT arrives (1 cube, several full function inputs
that could either be dedicated Megapixel displays or NeXTStep
interfaces in non-NeXT boxes. Indicate Megapixel or non-NeXT; if
non-NeXT, specify the machine.)
S. If IBM, which has licensed the NeXTStep interface, markets it
T. If bugs are eliminated in the operating system
U. If hardware reliability improves/is proven
V. If distribution is widened to include my university (name university)
W. If distribution is widened to more commercial vendors (suggest one)
X. If my company/university/department endorses it (specify)
Y. If customer support is improved (name support sought)
Z. If.... (please specify)
6. Which of the above possibilities are not absolute conditions for you,
but would carry significant favorable weight in your decision?
7. If you aren't seriously considering acquiring a NeXT in any incarnation,
why not?
A. Very happy with my own system (please specify)
B. Don't have enough (or any) information about NeXT
C. Already plan to buy another system (which system?)
D. Price of NeXT is prohibitively high
E. Don't think the NeXT will ever catch on
F. Don't like the user/programmer interface (why not?)
G. Require a different primary operating system or UNIX variant
(specify OS or variant)
H. Hardware is inadequate for needs (what is missing?)
I. Have heard too many negative things about NeXT (such as?)
J. Think the NeXT is "too much computer" for needs
K. Buying a NeXT is politically impossible (why?)
L. Other (please specify)
8. Does the NeXT interest you enough that you want to find out more about it?
9. As a computer user, what percent of your interest or time is devoted to
end-user computing? To programming? To system administration? To
other activities (specify)? How might these percentages change if you
acquired a NeXT?
10. What do you think about how the NeXT has been marketed? Any suggestions
for improvement?eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) (12/19/89)
In <317@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> Geoffrey Amthor wrote: > Fans and flamers alike share one uncertainty, however: Will the NeXT > succeed in the marketplace? I answered this in email, but I cannot resist the urge to post one question to any NeXT fans reading news. To wit: Why should I buy Steve Jobs's Mac-on-steroids closed-architecture box when I can get cheaper, faster commodity iron with better standards conformance based on the 386? -- Eric S. Raymond = eric@snark.uu.net (mad mastermind of TMN-Netnews)
jpd00964@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (12/20/89)
/* Written 3:32 pm Dec 18, 1989 by eric@snark.uu.net in uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.object */ > >I answered this in email, but I cannot resist the urge to post one question >to any NeXT fans reading news. To wit: > >Why should I buy Steve Jobs's Mac-on-steroids closed-architecture box when >I can get cheaper, faster commodity iron with better standards conformance >based on the 386? -- Eric S. Raymond = eric@snark.uu.net (mad mastermind of TMN-Netnews) /* End of text from uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.object */ I know I have asked many people to stop this war before it gets personal, but this one just gets me a little to much. flame on piss off flame off Michael Rutman This is my opinion only, though I am sure many people share it with me.
edm002@muvms3.bitnet (12/21/89)
In article <1TqpCt#6PkSJw=eric@snark.uu.net>, eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) writes: > In <317@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> Geoffrey Amthor wrote: >> Fans and flamers alike share one uncertainty, however: Will the NeXT >> succeed in the marketplace? > > I answered this in email, but I cannot resist the urge to post one question > to any NeXT fans reading news. To wit: > > Why should I buy Steve Jobs's Mac-on-steroids closed-architecture box when > I can get cheaper, faster commodity iron with better standards conformance > based on the 386? Does anybody else notice the "Lisa Syndrome" evident in the NeXT computer? Maybe this is one for the paradigm discussion, but I've observed a progression of successive Lisa-likes from the Jobs enterprise(s) ever since the $10,000 computer bit the dust years ago. It seems as though, when Lisa wouldn't sell on its own, we got a much-reduced version in the Macintosh. Then the Mac started its trek upward in cost and capability, with each model becoming more Lisa-like. Now, finally, we get Lisa for the 90's with voice mail and Webster's Dictionary thrown in. I'm a Mac person myself, but I have been intrigued at the apparently obsessive duplication of Lisa-like machines. I get the feeling that Jobs *knows* what we need, even if we don't, and he's going to be ready when we finally realize the error of our ways and how we should have bought those Lisa's years ago. Is there a Lisa Paradigm at work here? Just thought I'd ask. -- edm002@muvms3.bitnet,Marshall University Fred R. Reenstjerna | I stick my neck out 400 Hal Greer Blvd | for no one. Huntington, WV 25755 | ---Humphrey Bogart (304)696 - 2905 | CASABLANCA, 1943
skrenta@blekko.UUCP (Rich Skrenta) (12/22/89)
In article <132000006@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu> jpd00964@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu writes: >> Why should I buy Steve Jobs's Mac-on-steroids closed-architecture box when >> I can get cheaper, faster commodity iron with better standards conformance >> based on the 386? Good question, I thought. I'm still waiting to see some answers. > I know I have asked many people to stop this war before it gets personal, but > this one just gets me a little to much. Huh? I haven't been overwhelmed by anyone's peacemaking efforts... And, what war? > flame on > piss off > flame off Quite an endoresement for the machine. Rich
jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) (12/25/89)
/ comp.object / eric@snark.uu.net (Eric S. Raymond) / Dec 18, 1989 / Why should I buy Steve Jobs's Mac-on-steroids closed-architecture box when I can get cheaper, faster commodity iron with better standards conformance based on the 386? ---------- Because you like BSD so much more than SYSV? :-) It depends on what you want to spend your time on. If you are already comfortable with SYSV and X11, and don't mind spending the time buying and installing them on your 386, then it's probably better for you. I don't know if X applications on it will be much (or any) faster than NextStep applications on the NeXT. NeXT is also pretty fast if you stay away from the window system (not that I'd want to). This has nothing to do with the charter of this group anymore... Jacob -- Jacob Gore Jacob@Gore.Com boulder!gore!jacob
alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells) (12/27/89)
In article <11199@muvms3.bitnet> edm002@muvms3.bitnet writes: >... I get the feeling that Jobs *knows* what we need, even if we don't, and >he's going to be ready when we finally realize the error of our ways and how >we should have bought those Lisa's years ago. ... I think you are being a little over generous here, and perhaps there is a bit of hero worship thrown in? The Lisa failed for the same three reasons that the Xerox Star (which it was a 'clone' of) failed: - It was too expensive and required too many resources - It didn't do single tasks as well as less expensive machines - It was slowwwwwwwww The biggest thing that Apple did to make the Mac marketable was to get rid of the multi-tasking operating system. Of course, that is now one of the Macs biggest weaknesses ... technology changes and you have to have the right box for the technology of today, or at least the near future. Xerox clearly did a lot of revolutionary things. Jobs was clever enough to realize what they had done. He has spent a lot of his career trying to commercialize it. However, along with his clever side is a dark side which is just as strong. He was responsible for the 128K and the lack of slots which almost killed the Mac and gave it the nickname of Macintoy. From all accounts (especially from contacts at Next) he is incredibly arrogant and almost impossible to work for unless you are a professional syncophant. As to NeXT, they have done some very good things in the software. Expect to see these copied very quickly in other more 'mainstream' environments. At that point, NeXT is left with a quirky box with major problems. For instance, there are a number of systems being set up which will allow you to write in C++ to the Mac, OS/2, Windows, OSF/Motif, and Open Look through a transparent shell which converts your code to appropriate system calls. Note the lack of support for NeXT and its Objective C. As the saying goes, you can tell the pioneers by the arrows in their backs. In other words, NeXT was unique, but not unique enough. The window isn't going to be large enough to establish it as an alternate standard (as the Mac did) before its competitive advantage is gone (probably in late '90). Once the advantages are gone, who will want to program for a non-standard box with a limited market? If only IBM had come out with the new RT sooner ... perhaps they would have had a chance ... -- --------| Rest assured that a walk through the ocean of most souls Alien | would scarcely get your feet wet. - Deteriorata --------| decvax!frog!cpoint!alien bu-cs!mirror!frog!cpoint!alien
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/01/90)
In article <3262@cpoint.UUCP> alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells) writes: > The biggest thing that Apple did to make the Mac marketable was to get rid of > the multi-tasking operating system. That had nothing to do with it, dude. It was cramming it into such a cheap box. Now that involved subsuming *everything* to the window system, but there's nothing inherent in multitasking operating systems that would have cost more than a couple of K to keep such a thing in. Penny wise and pound foolish... And a little less than two years later a machine not a hell of a lot more powerful than the Mac Plus came out with one built in. And back to someone else's comment, this has nothing to do with comp.object. Let me redirect it to, oh, comp.sys.misc? > If only IBM had come out with the new RT sooner ... perhaps they would have > had a chance ... Or if they'd used C++ and NeWS instead of O-C and Display Postscript. -- `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. 'U` Also <peter@ficc.lonestar.org> or <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>. "It was just dumb luck that Unix managed to break through the Stupidity Barrier and become popular in spite of its inherent elegance." -- gavin@krypton.sgi.com