Alfredo.Jimenez@f54.n382.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Alfredo Jimenez) (01/26/91)
For twice the price I can get ten times the computational power. Sounds like a bargain. But the way I see it, a computer is a box and if the box does the job then why not go with the cheaper box. I have useful software currently running on a macplus and volumes of data. Should I consider moving to a Next? Also, any thoghts on market penetration for the Next versus the Mac? If I buy a Next will I be the only kid in this sandbox with this high-tech shovel? After six years, is it time to dump Apple? -- Alfredo Jimenez via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH UUCP: ...!osu-cis!n8emr!cmhgate!382!54!Alfredo.Jimenez INET: Alfredo.Jimenez@f54.n382.z1.FIDONET.ORG
edgar@shape.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) (01/31/91)
>Also, any thoghts on market penetration for the Next versus the Mac? If I >buy a Next will I be the only kid in this sandbox with this high-tech >shovel? Probably. MacWorld magazine says that 1 million Macs will be sold in 1991. -- Gerald A. Edgar Department of Mathematics Bitnet: EDGAR@OHSTPY The Ohio State University Internet: edgar@mps.ohio-state.edu Columbus, OH 43210 ...!{att,pyramid}!osu-cis!shape.mps.ohio-state.edu!edgar
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (01/31/91)
In article <1991Jan31.132606.9845@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu> edgar@shape.mps.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) writes: >Also, any thoghts on market penetration for the Next versus the Mac? If I >buy a Next will I be the only kid in this sandbox with this high-tech >shovel? Probably. MacWorld magazine says that 1 million Macs will be sold in 1991. Will that give Apple 10% of the market? How many Mac's has Apple sold? There are anywhere from 25 to 40 million DOS machines. If you want that warm and fuzzy feeling of owning a machine that everyone else owns, buy a PC. NeXT is starting to catch on. The lack of software is its main problem, but they do have some big names like Word Perfect, Lotus, FrameMaker, Quark XPress, and Adobe writing software for the NeXT. Pick up a the first issue of NeXT World, and read comp.sys.next for a couple of weeks. That should give you some idea of how NeXT is doing. -Mike
macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Dennis H Lippert) (02/01/91)
In article <md9G!eib@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >Will that give Apple 10% of the market? How many Mac's has Apple >sold? There are anywhere from 25 to 40 million DOS machines. If you >want that warm and fuzzy feeling of owning a machine that everyone >else owns, buy a PC. > >NeXT is starting to catch on. The lack of software is its main >problem, but they do have some big names like Word Perfect, Lotus, >FrameMaker, Quark XPress, and Adobe writing software for the NeXT. >Pick up a the first issue of NeXT World, and read comp.sys.next for a >couple of weeks. That should give you some idea of how NeXT is doing. > >-Mike Who are you, anyway? For a week or so now, this current Mac/NeXT war has been going on, and your name has become increasingly familiar. It seems as though you are the *entire* NeXT side of this conversation. It's been stated before that the NeXT is not truly a home computer. I have no *valid reason* to own anything more than my Classic, with the possible exception of a few serious number-crunching programs. If I want number crunching... I'll use a mainframe at my school/employment. To modify a subject line of a few months ago... Surely a VAX 9000 blows a NeXT away! I've spent considerable time with a Mac IIsi, and a bit of time with a NeXT, my computer is my hobby... it sort of defeats the purpose of a hobby to do things as quickly as possible. Sure, more power is fun, but it's far from necessary. And I'd get lost on a 17" screen. Maybe for this reason, you could call me an "average Mac User who wouldn't need a NeXT". Maybe so, but a whole lot more people use SEs than use IIfx's. For the same reason, more people will use Macs (cheap ones) than NeXTs. Now, let's get back to Mac discussions, will we? How about a new newsgroup: Comp.sys.mine-is-better-than-yours, possibly with Mac-PC, Amiga-Mac, Mac-NeXT subgroups. Dennis Lippert - macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu
sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Mark T. Sandrock) (02/01/91)
macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Dennis H Lippert) writes: >In article <md9G!eib@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >>NeXT is starting to catch on. The lack of software is its main >>problem, but they do have some big names like Word Perfect, Lotus, >>FrameMaker, Quark XPress, and Adobe writing software for the NeXT. >>Pick up a the first issue of NeXT World, and read comp.sys.next for a >>couple of weeks. That should give you some idea of how NeXT is doing. >Who are you, anyway? >For a week or so now, this current Mac/NeXT war has been going on, and your >name has become increasingly familiar. It seems as though you are the *entire* >NeXT side of this conversation. It's been stated before that the NeXT is not >truly a home computer. I have no *valid reason* to own anything more than my >Classic, with the possible exception of a few serious number-crunching programs. And who are you? You don't speak for this newsgroup any more than anyone else. I find the Mac-NeXT comparisons quite interesting and informative. I use an accelerated Mac Plus with a Radius FPD, which I have been slowly upgrading for the past 4 years, but if I were starting out today I would have to give serious consideration to the NeXT as a viable DTP platform. "Wars" are a waste of net bandwidth--we all agree--so let's all cut each other a little slack then. Besides, the Mac and the NeXT have something important in common: Steve Jobs. This makes the comparison especially interesting, I think. Check out the recent MacWorld (or MacUser) article--the new NeXT compares quite well against the high-end Macs. (Sorry if this has already been pointed out too often!) Regards, Mark Sandrock -- BITNET: sandrock@uiucscs Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Internet: sandrock@aries.scs.uiuc.edu Chemical Sciences Computing Services Voice: 217-244-0561 505 S. Mathews Ave., Urbana, IL 61801 "...make every effort to supplement your ...virtue with knowledge" 2 Peter 1:5
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (02/01/91)
In article <13255@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> krk@cs.purdue.EDU (Kevin Kuehl) writes:
Or NeXT could just dump Display PostScript. God, PostScript was a dog
when Sun unofficially dumped NeWS (I believe they still support their
users stupid enough to lock into it) and it is still a dog on the
Silicon Graphics -- rumors say they are dumping it also. A graphics
coprocessor won't help much, PostScript is slow even on a 33 MIPS
Turbo Iris.
kuehlkr@mentor.cc.purude.edu
I know people(and have seen a lot of articles posted by people), who
state that Sun should have never dropped News. They claim it was
great. Sun still ships News with their OpenLook system(
X11/News/Sunview). It might be a scaled down version though. Read
comp.windows.misc and sooner or later someone will mention News.
HP is rumored to have a 50mip machine that they will be releasing
sometime this year. The entry level price is around $10,000. I say
bag low-level programming and device-dependant imaging models.
Computer performance is such that we can afford to waste a few mips on
Display Postscript, OO programming, and other high level languages.
You might say "C forever", but will your competition?
-Mikels1i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Leonard John Schultz) (02/02/91)
On 31-Jan-91 in Re: Mac LC or NEXT user Dennis H Lippert@unix.ci writes: >In article <md9G!eib@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) write >s: >>Will that give Apple 10% of the market? How many Mac's has Apple >>sold? There are anywhere from 25 to 40 million DOS machines. If you >>want that warm and fuzzy feeling of owning a machine that everyone >>else owns, buy a PC. >> >>NeXT is starting to catch on. The lack of software is its main >>problem, but they do have some big names like Word Perfect, Lotus, >>FrameMaker, Quark XPress, and Adobe writing software for the NeXT. >>Pick up a the first issue of NeXT World, and read comp.sys.next for a >>couple of weeks. That should give you some idea of how NeXT is doing. >> >>-Mike > >Who are you, anyway? > >For a week or so now, this current Mac/NeXT war has been going on, and your >name has become increasingly familiar. It seems as though you are the *entire* >NeXT side of this conversation. It's been stated before that the NeXT is not >truly a home computer. I have no *valid reason* to own anything more than my >Classic, with the possible exception of a few serious number-crunching programs. >If I want number crunching... I'll use a mainframe at my school/employment. > >To modify a subject line of a few months ago... >Surely a VAX 9000 blows a NeXT away! > >I've spent considerable time with a Mac IIsi, and a bit of time with a NeXT, >my computer is my hobby... it sort of defeats the purpose of a hobby to do >things as quickly as possible. Sure, more power is fun, but it's far from >necessary. And I'd get lost on a 17" screen. Maybe for this reason, you >could call me an "average Mac User who wouldn't need a NeXT". Maybe so, but >a whole lot more people use SEs than use IIfx's. For the same reason, more >people will use Macs (cheap ones) than NeXTs. > >Now, let's get back to Mac discussions, will we? How about a new newsgroup: > Comp.sys.mine-is-better-than-yours, >possibly with Mac-PC, Amiga-Mac, Mac-NeXT subgroups. > >Dennis Lippert - macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu Dennis, Please calm down. It seems to me that Alfredo had a question about LC vs NeXT and Michael answered one of Alfredo's concerns about software availability and the longevity of NeXT. There is nothing wrong with that. If you hate NeXT for some reason or just hate fast computers and large screens :-), that is fine. But please don't attack people for helping someone with a computer question. That is what this bboard was created for. ps Alfredo, If you are reading this, I suggest you post your original question to netnews.comp.sys.next also. If you ask a question about Computer#1 vs Computer#2 on a bboard that discusses Computer#1, then you will get a VERY biased response. You should get opinions from both sides of the firing line. Len
claytor@tandem.physics.upenn.edu (Nelson Claytor) (02/02/91)
Michael Mellinger writes: > Some people in this newsgroup act > like PC owners did a couple of years ago(some still do). "But there's > more software." "Does it run Lotus 123?" "Everyone else uses PC's!" > "Is it IBM compatible?" "Will Apple be in business in 5 years? IBM > surely will be." "I hate winodows. I like function keys." This sort of baiting is a bit absurd. The Mac and the NeXT represent a drastic paradigm shift from the PC; the NeXT does not offer a drastic shift from the Mac. The NeXT may be faster, it may be cheaper, it may have a DSP, but NeXTStep is not a drastic shift from the Mac interface. The NeXTs are very nice machines at very good prices (regardless of the fact that the NeXTDimension that keeps getting compared with a IIfx/24 bit card seems to be vapor for the indefinite future :-)), but they are not really so different as to justify a comparison of Mac users with PC users 5 years ago. After all, the PC people are *still* defending them, even after the Mac has removed all the "no software, no slots, no...." objections :-). Nelson Nelson Claytor claytor@tandem.physics.upenn.edu
rk39+@andrew.cmu.edu (Robert Joseph Kuszewski) (02/02/91)
macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Dennis H Lippert) writes >It's been stated before that the NeXT is not >truly a home computer. Where is the term "home computer" defined and how does NeXT not fit that definition? It seems to me that a "home computer" is one that can be used effectively in a home. That is: (1) it is not reliant on a network (as many UNIX mahcines are) and (2) It does not require an unusual environment (that is: it does not draw as much current as a VAX9000 or need a large, constant air motion, et cetera). Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the NeXT (as well as the Mac and PC) fits these criterion and, therefore, should be called a home computer. >I have no *valid reason* to own anything more than my >Classic, with the possible exception of a few serious number-crunching programs. A few things on this one... whether or not *you* have valid reason to have anything more powerful or faster than a Mac Classic has nothing to do with the comparison of the machines. In fact, I really don't think that too many people care if you need more power than a Mac Classic unless they are taking a survey of people's needs (which might be a good idea). The question is: for what applications do you need more power or less power than a given standard (like a classic) and how much patience do you have to wait for the computer to finish that task? For example, I need much more power than a classic, because I'm a programmer and need a reasonable compile-test-edit loop speed. Therefore, even a CX or CI is slow for me. In this case (and for other programming reasons) I would suggest a NeXT. On the other hand, if you are just using the machine for word processing and the editing speed of a low-end mac is good for you, I would suggest a Mac. >If I want number crunching... I'll use a mainframe at my school/employment. Didn't just just say that a mac is a home computer? I don't know about you, but I (like most people) don't have a mainframe in my basement. So the question is, what does the fact that *you* have access to a mainframe have to do with which machine is a better home computer? >my computer is my hobby... it sort of defeats the purpose of a hobby to do >things as quickly as possible. Most of us do not feel that way. A computer is a tool to help complete a given task in the minimum about of time and effort. If everyone felt the way you do, then we would all still be using PDP/11's. >And I'd get lost on a 17" screen. Maybe for this reason, you >could call me an "average Mac User who wouldn't need a NeXT". Because you would get lost on a 17" screen? Most of us would love to have a 17" grayscale on our desks, especially with a window-dependant multitasking environment. This way we can see the whole picture at once. >Maybe so, but >a whole lot more people use SEs than use IIfx's. For the same reason, more >people will use Macs (cheap ones) than NeXTs. There are more Commodore 64's than SE's out there. Does that mean that anyone interested in a reasonably-priced computer should get an C-64? Where does the question of computer reliability and power come into question? Only at a certain leved does it become important? If so, when and by who's definition? >Now, let's get back to Mac discussions, will we? How about a new newsgroup: > Comp.sys.mine-is-better-than-yours, >possibly with Mac-PC, Amiga-Mac, Mac-NeXT subgroups. This is coming from the same person who, in the same message, wrote: >For a week or so now, this current Mac/NeXT war has been going on, and your >name has become increasingly familiar. It seems as though you are the *entire* >NeXT side of this conversation. Later, Bob Executive Member Team Clueless
cs00jec@unccvax.uncc.edu (Jim Cain) (02/03/91)
In article <137661.27A25062@cmhgate.FIDONET.ORG> Alfredo.Jimenez@f54.n382.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Alfredo Jimenez) writes: >For twice the price I can get ten times the computational power. Sounds >like a bargain. But the way I see it, a computer is a box and if the box >does the job then why not go with the cheaper box. I have useful software >currently running on a macplus and volumes of data. Should I consider >moving to a Next? After 4 years of being a die-hard Mac evangelist, I patiently await the arrival of my NeXT. For about $3200 edu, I could not justify getting less than what the NeXT offers by sticking with my religion and buying a Mac IIsi. And I've got UNIX!! >Also, any thoghts on market penetration for the Next versus the Mac? If I >buy a Next will I be the only kid in this sandbox with this high-tech >shovel? After six years, is it time to dump Apple? NeXT appears to be on its way up. I can live with the lack of apps for now because I'll have all I need for the immediate future (all the development tools included, Mathematica, TeX, etc.). Of course that doesn't mean the NeXT will meet everyone's immediate needs. Apple seems to have lost their creative spirit IMHO. They are living on their past glories. It's time to move on. Jim Cain cs00jec@unccvax.uncc.edu
barnett@grymoire.crd.ge.com (Bruce Barnett) (02/04/91)
In article <jibGribc@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > I know people(and have seen a lot of articles posted by people), who > state that Sun should have never dropped News. They claim it was > great. Sun still ships News with their OpenLook system( > X11/News/Sunview). It might be a scaled down version though. Read > comp.windows.misc and sooner or later someone will mention News. You might even read comp.windows.news :-) NeWS was not scaled done. It was improved, and a new toolkit was included (although it is a prototype and unsupported). Now that Sun has a reasonable version of X, rumor has it thay are spending more time with NeWS. New, supported toolkits are rumored. Display PostScript and NeWS are two very different beasts. DP is a rendering engine, while NeWS is a complete environment. NeWS is more flexible that any other window system I have ever seen, and it has solved problems that the people using X windows won't solve for years, if ever. Yes, NeWS is neither public domain, nor 100% portable. Building applications using NeWS is like building applications using the Mac toolbox. :-) -- Bruce G. Barnett barnett@crd.ge.com uunet!crdgw1!barnett
fozzard@alumni.colorado.edu (Richard Fozzard) (02/05/91)
In article <jibGribc@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >bag low-level programming and device-dependant imaging models. >Computer performance is such that we can afford to waste a few mips on >Display Postscript, OO programming, and other high level languages. >You might say "C forever", but will your competition? Maybe so, but how many people will actually use your device-independent approaches? There is a limit to the performance hit that people are willing to take for device independence. I have talked with several NeXT developers, and they all have had to put special code in their programs that bypass DP and do things with straight bitmaps (or other technique) to get acceptable screen performance. Such code would presumably not port to NeWS, of course. And from the very beginning PC and Mac programmers (especially for games where performance is key) have bypassed the "proper" way of displaying to the screen. The hard fact is that programmers for a given platform will always "cheat" to get better performance, no matter how fast the platform. BTW, I find it ironic that a NeXTNuT would be defending programming for device independence, when a NeXTStep/Objective C program is about as device-dependent as you can get. The NeXT company and most of its user community has rejected X out-of-hand - NeXT is probably the only workstation manufacturer to not provide a company-supported X. I like the NeXT very much, and have used it to develop some small programs. It is a wonderful development environment, the best on the market, I'd say. Yet the code runs ONLY on a NeXT (and the very few IBM 6000s that NeXTStep has shipped for). That is exactly why I have failed to convince my superiors to buy any. The programs I build using Guide/OpenWindows on a Sun run on anything (even PCs and Macs) that can run an X-server. Programs I build in HyperCard run on Macs and PCs, and when Spinnaker finishes their Plus for X later this year, everything else. By refusing to provide a hardware-independent NeXTStep X toolkit, NeXT has negated the most significant advantage of its machine! No doubt, NeXTStep on top of X would run rather slowly, but at least it would RUN! And it seems to me that this would only help sales of NeXT hardware, as the fastest way to both write and run such programs. -- ======================================================================== Richard Fozzard "Serendipity empowers" Univ of Colorado/CIRES/NOAA R/E/FS 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303 fozzard@boulder.colorado.edu (303)497-6011 or 444-3168
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (02/05/91)
In article <1991Feb4.201342.28566@csn.org> fozzard@alumni.colorado.edu (Richard Fozzard) writes:
BTW, I find it ironic that a NeXTNuT would be defending programming for
device independence, when a NeXTStep/Objective C program is about as
device-dependent as you can get. The NeXT company and most of its user
community has rejected X out-of-hand - NeXT is probably the only
workstation manufacturer to not provide a company-supported X.
Yeah, not being able to use Objective C on another platform really
rots. However, GCC 2.0 will include Objective C, so it's not a
permanent problem, for some of us. It looks like it might be out by
summer.
Penncomm will officially ship X for the NeXT on March 15. I think
Motif has also been ported. There was a buggy, but usable version(and
free) that ran under 1.0, but not 2.0.
I like the NeXT very much, and have used it to develop some small programs.
It is a wonderful development environment, the best on the market, I'd say.
Yet the code runs ONLY on a NeXT (and the very few IBM 6000s that NeXTStep
has shipped for). That is exactly why I have failed to convince my
superiors to buy any. The programs I build using Guide/OpenWindows on
a Sun run on anything (even PCs and Macs) that can run an X-server.
Programs I build in HyperCard run on Macs and PCs, and when Spinnaker
finishes their Plus for X later this year, everything else.
Can't you localize your output routines? Just #ifdef. Write your
code in C or C++ and only use Objective C where you need to.
By refusing to provide a hardware-independent NeXTStep X toolkit,
NeXT has negated the most significant advantage of its machine!
No doubt, NeXTStep on top of X would run rather slowly, but at least
it would RUN! And it seems to me that this would only help sales
of NeXT hardware, as the fastest way to both write and run such
programs.
X is being beta-tested right now. Does X in one window and a PC AT in
another provide enough compatibility with the rest of the world?
-Mikeallbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) (02/05/91)
As quoted from <85859@unix.cis.pitt.edu> by macman@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Dennis H Lippert): +--------------- | Now, let's get back to Mac discussions, will we? How about a new newsgroup: | Comp.sys.mine-is-better-than-yours, | possibly with Mac-PC, Amiga-Mac, Mac-NeXT subgroups. +--------------- alt.religion.computers? ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN America OnLine: KB8JRR AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery Delphi: ALLBERY
allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery KB8JRR) (02/05/91)
As quoted from <agcGih-b@cs.psu.edu> by melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger): +--------------- | Then don't buy one. This isn't comp.sys.mac.classic. A variety of | people read this newsgroup. If you are only in the market for a Mac | Classic then buy one. NeXT doesn't offer a product for you. If you +--------------- This no doubt explains why he's still sending me mail to try to persuade me to switch from my SE to a NeXT.... ++Brandon -- Me: Brandon S. Allbery VHF/UHF: KB8JRR on 220, 2m, 440 Internet: allbery@NCoast.ORG Packet: KB8JRR @ WA8BXN America OnLine: KB8JRR AMPR: KB8JRR.AmPR.ORG [44.70.4.88] uunet!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery Delphi: ALLBERY
fozzard@alumni.colorado.edu (Richard Fozzard) (02/08/91)
In article <-v6G=!#e@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes : >X is being beta-tested right now. Does X in one window and a PC AT in >another provide enough compatibility with the rest of the world? This misses the point. I want NeXTStep on X, not X on NeXTStep. That is so programs I write using NeXTStep will run on other machines, perhaps with no more than a recompile. Then I would have a developer's dream machine. Until then, the NeXT is a slick personal computer for Unix geeks and undemanding desktop publishers. -- ======================================================================== Richard Fozzard "Serendipity empowers" Univ of Colorado/CIRES/NOAA R/E/FS 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303 fozzard@boulder.colorado.edu (303)497-6011 or 444-3168