[comp.sys.mac.misc] NAND + get a life norm

minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) (11/21/90)

NAND = Not Another NeXT Defector!

There actually is something original in here for the patient...

ls1i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Leonard John Schultz) writes:
| and there are no solid rumors of a Mac 040.  Where is the logic in
| comparing something that doesn't exist with something that is going in
| production next week?  From past experience, I would be surprised if we
| saw a Mac 040 within the next year.  By that time, NeXT may have 60 MHz
| NeXTstations on the market.  The fact is, NeXT is YEARS ahead of Apple
| in technology.  No one can deny this.
 	
ngg@bridge2.ESD.3Com.COM (Norman Goodger) replies:
| You must be living in a sheltered zone somewhere? It is no
| big secret that Apple has had 040 Mac's in development ever
| since Motorola was able to produce sample chips. As far
| as 60[MHz] systems, [NeXT] doesn't create its own CPU's, they
| can only do with the hardware provided, so if 60[MHz] chips
| come available, everyone will have them, Apple included.

  Norm, NeXT will beat Apple out the door as long as their shipments
remain small compared to Mac shipments. Tens of thousands of the new
Macs have been sold and they're shipping as fast as they're assembled.
Motorola simply can't provide 040s in quantities that Apple can use
at this time. This will probably continue to be true for some time.
  As far as rumors go, I've heard nothing about any 040 Mac yet I've
heard all sorts of details about the low cost machines for the better
part of a year. I'd call those rumors "solid" (certainly a poor word).
Of course Apple _is_ working on 040 machines but that doesn't mean they
have a specific product in mind yet.
 
Leonard John Schultz:
| Apple not only has CPU inferiority, but SCSI (5MB/s compared with
| 2MB/s), DMA (IIfx DMA won't even be supported in 7.0), DSP, video,
| networking....  I could go on forever about hardware without mentioning
| the superior software on the NeXT.  (When will Apple have a standard
| dictionary, something everyone complains about

  With the exception of DMA support, I don't see anything particularly
_lacking_ in the Mac hardware area. Sure they're nice to have but most
people wouldn't base a purchase solely on them. As far as software, if
you mean development tools, it appears that NeXT has an excellent
software suite and UNIX by design is a great OS for programmers. For
applications, I see nothing inherently better about the NeXT that would
make an average NeXT application more powerful/useful than the average
Mac application. (I'm talking about a DOS v Mac sort of difference,
here. I don't see this happening until we move away from applications to
pure objects so you can, say, paste a spreadsheet in a document and work
with it just as you do today in Excel/Wingz/mumble/.)
 
LJS:
| Furthermore, there is no System 7.0.  This has to be the most mismanaged
| project in recent history.  It was supposed to be introduced 1.5 years
| ago and won't be out for another year.  I don't like investing my money
| in a company that only makes promises and doesn't deliver.  Let's at
| least try to stick to reality.
 
NGG:
| Yes, lets stick to "reality". Apple announced its intentions
| of System 7.0 a little over a year ago. It did not say that it
| would be delivered back 1.5 years as you seem to indicate. Betas
| of System 7.0 are out now and its looking very good. While it
| may not be coming as fast as some would like, you seem to forget
| how long you were waiting for Next OS releases eh, not to mention
| systems, for which one can still continue to wait for the new ones.

  Norm, only a small minority thinks Apple hasn't screwed up pretty
badly. Many features have been dropped from System 7 (most notably,
IMHO, the new print architecture) and it's still running late. I have
been told by various sales critters that 7.0 was "just around the
corner" since the summer of '88. Using generous quantities of salt, I
predicted a ship date sometime in 1Q '89 but then looked to last summer
and now I've given up hope. I won't even think about it until I see
rumors on UseNet about ship dates/distribution methods. IMO, Sys 7 is
still vapor and it can't be used as an incentive to buy a Mac at this 
time without lots of disappointment.
  I'm seriously considering a NeXT because it does much of what I
(a CS student, admittedly) want and it does it right now. I also like
the idea of Interface Builder et al. Apple has not announced any concrete
plans in that area so why should I expect they might? I appreciate UNIX
<gasp> and protected memory and preemptive multitasking. I also like
the idea of multi-threaded programs. To add these to the Mac (A/UX is
the closest bet so far) is prohibitively expensive. Likewise, getting
a NeXT box at < $1000 is not possible. For me, the IIsi is the minimum
reasonable Mac. (read that twice!) I see nothing great about the Classic
other than price. It's much the same thing as the original (classic?)
Mac. Apple has succeeded in cloning a Mac. Wow. <HUGE SMILEY HERE>

As a service to the new:
IMHO = In my humble opinion
IMO  = In my opinion

Sidenote: who was the wiseguy who thought up of the funky CaPItalIsaTiON?
-- 
|_    /| | Robert Minich            |
|\'o.O'  | Oklahoma State University| A fanatic is one who sticks to 
|=(___)= | minich@d.cs.okstate.edu  | his guns -- whether they are 
|   U    | - Ackphtth               | loaded or not.