melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (02/17/91)
In article <1991Feb16.020056.11742@NCoast.ORG> allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) writes:
Look, friend. Advertizers have done a very, very good job of convincing
everyone in the U.S. that everyone needs an all-singing, all-dancing mega-
computer just to balance their checkbooks. THAT is what p*sses me off. And
then you NeXT types come in and perpetuate the myth.
People that use a computer just to balance their checkbooks probably
don't need a computer. Try using a $5 calculator, a pen, and some
paper.
Most people do NOT really need NeXTs, or IIfx's. In fact, most people don't
need 386 boxes, but most people go out and get them (to run DOS, which doesn't
even *use* the 386's capabilities except in the most minimal ways (assuming
QEMM, 386^MAX, Windows 3.0, or etc.)!) anyway. Because everyone has been
trained to jump through their hoops and go buy the biggest, fastest, most
expensive thing they can regardless of whether they need it or not.
Most people don't need more than 64K of RAM, right? At least that's
what you were probably saying 5 years ago. You obviously haven't used
Windows 3.0 if you think PC users don't need a 386. And to use
Toolbook, the PC equivalent of Hypercard, I definitely recommend a 386.
Your persistent attempts to pull this wool over all our eyes set me off.
I may be a particularly extreme example, but that doesn't mean I'm the ONLY
example. Use some sense: you have, perhaps, heard of bell curves? Just
because I'm at the far side doesn't mean that the curve looks like a huge,
narrow spike and me alone way off to one side.
Don't worry you're not alone, I know plenty of other people like you.
Of course you are still wrong.
By the way, you are also wrong(IMHO) about people switching to System
7.0. I think most people will switch. Isn't that the reason Apple is
shipping most Macs with 2 megs of RAM and a 40MB hard drive? They
want you to switch. I do wish Apple would ship machines with 2.88MB
floppy drives, then a 2 floppy system might be feasable again.
-Mikeoleary@ux.acs.umn.edu (Doc O'Leary) (02/17/91)
In article <1e3G7w*o@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > >In article <1991Feb16.020056.11742@NCoast.ORG> allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) writes: > Most people do NOT really need NeXTs, or IIfx's. In fact, most people don't > need 386 boxes, but most people go out and get them (to run DOS, which doesn't > even *use* the 386's capabilities except in the most minimal ways (assuming > QEMM, 386^MAX, Windows 3.0, or etc.)!) anyway. Because everyone has been > trained to jump through their hoops and go buy the biggest, fastest, most > expensive thing they can regardless of whether they need it or not. > >Most people don't need more than 64K of RAM, right? At least that's >what you were probably saying 5 years ago. You obviously haven't used >Windows 3.0 if you think PC users don't need a 386. And to use >Toolbook, the PC equivalent of Hypercard, I definitely recommend a 386. One of my jobs is as a lab attendant in the computer lab for the Veterinary College here. The lab has recently been overhauled and our old XT's have been replaced by 386SX's (Our Mac's are back-ordered and I (being an insignificant attendant as far as the administration is concerned) don't know what kind we're getting, but I'm quitting if they're Classics). They came bundled with all of Microsoft's wonderful software, including Word and Excel for Windows (Toolbook, Softtype, blah, blah, too). Now, I'm not saying that Window's isn't a good product. I'll agree that, yes, it *is* a huge step up from MS-DOS. However, this is not a Computer Science lab!! It is a Veterinary lab! The kind of software we run here (for classes) is PigChamp. For those who don't use it, PigChamp does not need Windows to run. Here, a 286 would have been fine. If the students wanted to use a GUI to write papers when we re-open, they could use a Mac's. I'm willing to bet that Hypercard, even on a Classic, is much faster than Toolbook on a 386SX. Where am I going, you ask yourself. Well, imagine my surprise when I walk in and find a newly acquired 486 tower! It's a wonderful, beautiful machine. It's also complete overkill. This is a > $17,000 machine (BTW, all PC's are PS/2's from IBM). Sure, with the educational discount it probably only cost $15,000, but you don't need a Ferrari to go to the corner market and you don't need a 486 to run PigChamp! (To be fair, I found out that it would be used as a fileserver; what a wonderful waste of 33MHz) Some things are unjustified. A University computer lab needs better than Classics, but our does not need more than a IIsi. I would be equally surprised if I were to have walked in and found a IIfx staring me in the face. Or a NeXT. Some people need a 386, but if their only need for it is to run Windows, they should get a Mac (even a Classic). Yes, certain things are nice. A IIfx is nice. A 486 is nice. A NeXT is nice. It's hard for me to justify the purchase of a IIfx (just because I could afford it) when I know that some people can't even afford my SE, or a place to live, or clothes for their children. For some people, the above computers are necessary to do their jobs, but an SE is all I need right now. Don't tell me I need a NeXT or a 386/486 or even a IIfx, because I don't. Flame away. ********************** Signature Block : Version 2.1 ********************* * | * * "Was it love, or was it the idea | If at first you don't succeed . . . * * of being in love?" -- PF | you have failed. * * (Which one *is* Pink?) | * * | oleary@ux.acs.umn.edu * ****************** Copyright (c) 1991 by Doc O'Leary ********************
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (02/17/91)
In article <3287@ux.acs.umn.edu> oleary@ux.acs.umn.edu (Doc O'Leary) writes:
Now, I'm not saying that Window's isn't a good product. I'll agree that, yes,
it *is* a huge step up from MS-DOS. However, this is not a Computer Science
lab!! It is a Veterinary lab! The kind of software we run here (for classes)
is PigChamp. For those who don't use it, PigChamp does not need Windows to
run. Here, a 286 would have been fine. If the students wanted to use a GUI to
write papers when we re-open, they could use a Mac's. I'm willing to bet
that Hypercard, even on a Classic, is much faster than Toolbook on a 386SX.
Probably right. Most DOS weenies are going with the assumption that
Toolbook is going to get faster. It's only 1.0. They're just happy
that they finally have Hypercard on the PC.
Where am I going, you ask yourself. Well, imagine my surprise when I walk in
and find a newly acquired 486 tower! It's a wonderful, beautiful machine.
It's also complete overkill. This is a > $17,000 machine (BTW, all PC's are
PS/2's from IBM). Sure, with the educational discount it probably only cost
$15,000, but you don't need a Ferrari to go to the corner market and you don't
need a 486 to run PigChamp! (To be fair, I found out that it would be used as
a fileserver; what a wonderful waste of 33MHz)
Penn State has the same nasty habit of wasting money on IBM PC's too.
Just think, your school spent $17K on a machine that isn't as fast as
a $3300 NeXT. Is the $17K an educational price? That is a bit steep!
Some things are unjustified. A University computer lab needs better than
Classics, but our does not need more than a IIsi. I would be equally surprised
if I were to have walked in and found a IIfx staring me in the face. Or a
NeXT. Some people need a 386, but if their only need for it is to run Windows,
they should get a Mac (even a Classic).
What do IIsi's cost? I would guess around $2000. My big complaint is
that for $1300 more you can have the IIfx(and more). You could always
run your DOS software in a window using SoftPC and still have a
friendly GUI like the Macs. It's a machine that will meet the needs
of both markets. The current NeXT machine will continue to meet your
in the coming years too. The software you have now runs fine on a
286, but what about other software? I expect that most of the new PC
software released over the next year will be Window's applications.
Time to buy a new lab!?! Guess what, pigChamp II is now networkable.
A lab full of students can now build the perfect pig, each working at
his own computer. Educational software is about to move past the page
flipping(and card flipping) stage.
Yes, certain things are nice. A IIfx is nice. A 486 is nice. A NeXT is nice.
It's hard for me to justify the purchase of a IIfx (just because I could
afford it) when I know that some people can't even afford my SE, or a place to
live, or clothes for their children. For some people, the above computers
are necessary to do their jobs, but an SE is all I need right now. Don't
tell me I need a NeXT or a 386/486 or even a IIfx, because I don't.
Flame away.
You will have to use a NeXT to understand why it's not overkill. It's
not a 15mip machine running DOS. And even if the NeXT was more power
than you needed, why pay the same amount of money for a computer that
is less powerful?
Computers cost too much to throw them away every two years. Think
about this two years from now when Windows 4.0 and System 8.0 are
released.
-Mikekrk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) (02/18/91)
In article <zt4Grn3p@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >What do IIsi's cost? I would guess around $2000. My big complaint is >that for $1300 more you can have the IIfx(and more). Or you could look at it this way -- for $700 more than a IIfx you can get a pair of IIsi's. This allows two people to use computers instead of only one. I can't claim I came up with this idea, I got it from the Facilities Manager at Purdue. :-) >of both markets. The current NeXT machine will continue to meet your >in the coming years too. Not necessarily. If you don't need (or even want) Unix, a slow windowing system and need expandability and hand-holding (not all of us are technoweebs), you would be best to look somewhere else than NeXT. Expandability and hand-holding are where I think the IBM machines really shine compared to the rest of the market. :-( >not a 15mip machine running DOS. And even if the NeXT was more power >than you needed, why pay the same amount of money for a computer that >is less powerful? The age old drum-beat of NeXT users: Unix + MIPs = Power. Too bad the workstation users can't learn from the mainframe users. Ask them if the IBM mainframes provides the most brute CPU (well, except for the 3090). -- Kevin Kuehl krk@cs.purdue.edu kuehlkr@mentor.cc.purude.edu
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (02/18/91)
In article <13469@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> krk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) writes: Or you could look at it this way -- for $700 more than a IIfx you can get a pair of IIsi's. This allows two people to use computers instead of only one. I can't claim I came up with this idea, I got it from the Facilities Manager at Purdue. :-) When you look at it that way, the IIsi looks pretty good. Actually, it's not too bad. Apple didn't cripple it by limiting it to 8 megs of RAM? It does have the 030 so virtual memory will come with 7.0. As for the FPU, oh well. Word 4 will run just as fast. Not necessarily. If you don't need (or even want) Unix, a slow windowing system and need expandability and hand-holding (not all of us are technoweebs), you would be best to look somewhere else than NeXT. Expandability and hand-holding are where I think the IBM machines really shine compared to the rest of the market. :-( What's with this I don't want Unix? I want preemptive multitasking, networking, virtual memory and memory protection. I will use OS/2, if and when they ever finished it. I'm not that religous about the machine I use. >not a 15mip machine running DOS. And even if the NeXT was more power >than you needed, why pay the same amount of money for a computer that >is less powerful? The age old drum-beat of NeXT users: Unix + MIPs = Power. Too bad the workstation users can't learn from the mainframe users. Ask them if the IBM mainframes provides the most brute CPU (well, except for the 3090). Unix + mips + Display Postscript + Interface Builder + Objective C + Networking = Increased Functionality The reason most Mac people don't understand this, and rightly so, is because the multitude of applications haven't arrived yet. Word Perfect and Lotus Improv were just released within the past month. Adobe Illustrator and Quark Xpress still haven't shipped. The 040 NeXT has only been shipping for two months. We're at the beginning of the NeXT "revolution"(for lack of a more applicable word). It will be more obvious in a year. -Mike
davoli@natinst.com (Russell Davoli) (02/19/91)
In article <y_6G*3wp@cs.psu.edu>, melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > > In article <13469@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> krk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) writes: > > Or you could look at it this way -- for $700 more than a IIfx you can > get a pair of IIsi's. This allows two people to use computers instead > of only one. I can't claim I came up with this idea, I got it from > the Facilities Manager at Purdue. :-) > > When you look at it that way, the IIsi looks pretty good. Actually, > it's not too bad. Apple didn't cripple it by limiting it to 8 megs of > RAM? It does have the 030 so virtual memory will come with 7.0. As > for the FPU, oh well. Word 4 will run just as fast. What's this about crippling the IIsi by limiting it to 8 Meg physical memory? As higher capacity SIMs become available, you're supposed to be able to expand physical memory to something like 65 Meg. > What's with this I don't want Unix? I want preemptive multitasking, > networking, virtual memory and memory protection. I definitely want memory protection -- too bad UNIX seems to be the only popular OS that offers this on micros. For a personal machine, the virtual memory stuff seems most necessary, and preemptive multitasking would be nice if it doesn't slow down response to me. I'm generally satisfied with the cooperative multitasking on the Mac, except when things like the print spooler take over. Reminds me of printing on the next with its 0.8 OS release. Ugh. > Unix + mips + Display Postscript + Interface Builder + Objective C + Networking > = Increased Functionality > > The reason most Mac people don't understand this, and rightly so, is > because the multitude of applications haven't arrived yet. Word > Perfect and Lotus Improv were just released within the past month. > Adobe Illustrator and Quark Xpress still haven't shipped. The 040 > NeXT has only been shipping for two months. We're at the beginning of > the NeXT "revolution"(for lack of a more applicable word). It will be > more obvious in a year. > > -Mike Maybe so. I'm still skeptical and I'll believe it when I see it. I remember all the hype around the Amiga for its first year and it's still a fairly minor player in the market. To be fair though, NeXT seems to be much more organized and focused than Commodore ever has been, IMHO. I guess my big beef with this thread is that we're all spending lots of time trying to convince each other that our machine exactly the features that Everyuser must have to become productive. Despite the coolness of the NeXT, I don't plan on buying one soon, mostly because I can't get the discount prices. I also don't plan on buying a new Mac to replace my aging Mac Plus as my home machine simply because I don't do a lot with it besides games at home. Coming home from work, I don't much feel like programming and would rather invest my time in something else, like reading Shelby Foote's excellent history of the Civil War. Anyway, I guess my point is that despite the effort both sides have expended to convince me that I should buy their machine, I'm staying put because my needs justify neither at this point. Whew, it feels good to get that off my chest. -Russell Davoli
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (02/19/91)
>Maybe so. I'm still skeptical and I'll believe it when I see it. I >remember all the hype around the Amiga for its first year and it's still >a fairly minor player in the market. To be fair though, NeXT seems to be >much more organized and focused than Commodore ever has been, IMHO. > Part of this is because the computer community druels whenever Steve Jobs opens his mouth. He has gotten constant attention for anything he does, as well as ENORMOUS financial backing. He has had a certain amount of respect from day 1. Commodore, meanwhile, doesn't have anywhere near the financial resources of NeXT (primarily due to very low costs [no salesmen 8] and certain individuals). Commodore is also ignored by all the so called "computer insiders". I have seen instances where the name "Commodore" was purposely removed from articles (I saw the article it was based on). Commodore has a lot of proving to do to recover from the C-64 game-machine image. NeXT had a head-start. This is comp.sys.MAC.misc, isn't it?? 8-) -- Ethan Q: What's the definition of a Quayle? A: Two right wings and no backbone.