nagendra@bucsf.bu.edu (nagendra mishr) (09/15/90)
I don't think any of you guys who say stick with a GS have ever used a SGI machine. I mean come on, the world is not like it was five years ago when text based applications were it. I mean now, with Object Oriented Languages comming out and new research based graphical system on the market Who wants basically a text machine. as far as I'm concerned, we should all wait until Someone puts out the real power computers for desktop use. Next tried it, but noone wanted to do that. But you know, the Next really is the way to go. Well the color next, or wait for General Magic's Communicator. Which should create a whirlwind in current computer thinking. seriouly, quit wasting your money, and force Apple to put out better machines. It's not all that hard for them to create it, it's just their idea of what will make money. If you must flame, do so in my personal account, not on the net. nagendra@bucsf.bu.edu
cbdougla@uokmax.uucp (Collin Broad Douglas) (09/15/90)
In article <NAGENDRA.90Sep14195437@bucsf.bu.edu> nagendra@bucsf.bu.edu (nagendra mishr) writes: >I don't think any of you guys who say stick with a GS have ever used a SGI >machine. I mean come on, the world is not like it was five years ago when >text based applications were it. I mean now, with Object Oriented >Languages comming out and new research based graphical system on the market >Who wants basically a text machine. >as far as I'm concerned, we should all wait until Someone puts out the real >power computers for desktop use. >Next tried it, but noone wanted to do that. But you know, the Next really >is the way to go. Well the color next, or wait for General Magic's >Communicator. Which should create a whirlwind in current computer thinking. > >seriouly, quit wasting your money, and force Apple to put out better >machines. >It's not all that hard for them to create it, it's just their idea of >what will make money. > >If you must flame, do so in my personal account, not on the net. >nagendra@bucsf.bu.edu I'm not going to flame you. I just want to know what you are talking about. I really have no idea. the GS is a GUI based machine. It's operating system (GS/OS) includes the Finder, Icons etc. including an Object Oriented kernel (from what I remember). It uses loaded drivers and can plug into an Appletalk network as a diskless machine (if you want). etc. The GS comes with a mouse. and GS programs use it. THe only programs that don't use it are programs that were written for the Apple //e (except for the unix type programming shells and such). The NeXT wasn't designed for desktop use. At least, not your 'normal' desktop. Who really needs a 25 Mhz desktop machine unless you are doing some REALLY heavy duty stuff. I agree that Apple needs to do some major thinking into what do to with the GS and the GS needs some definite hardware improvement (speed and resolution improvements for example) But please know a little more about the subject material when you post. Collin Douglas cbdougla@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu
philip@yunexus.yorku.ca (Phil McDunnough) (09/16/90)
In article <NAGENDRA.90Sep14195437@bucsf.bu.edu> nagendra@bucsf.bu.edu (nagendra mishr) writes: >I don't think any of you guys who say stick with a GS have ever used a SGI >machine. Really? On the contrary, many of us have more experience than you might think. The real issue you seem to fail to understand is that a Silicon Graphics' Iris is hardly targeted at the same audience as a GS, or any other micro for that matter. I don't know why I'm replying to this as your posting seems so strange that I'm not sure whether or not you really mean it. Many of us make quite good use of our GS's( and Mac's) despite our inability to do real time 3-D graphics! In any case what the GS needs is not to become a SGI 4-D, but a price cut, the ability to share more peripherals with the Mac line(eg. monitors), file sharing, a faster cpu and fewer letters like yours. Philip McDunnough University of Toronto philip@utstat.toronto.edu [my opinions]