[comp.sys.amiga.advocacy] NeXT >> 386SX

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/05/91)

In article <9.5G6e#u@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
> In article <1991Feb17.004210.5827@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>    You can buy a 386SX box with VGA and room for 8 MB on the motherboard
>    for $875. That's big enough to run UNIX, easily. In fact you can probably
>    get the box, a big disk, and the UNIX license (V.3.2) for the neighborhood
>    of $2000.

>    Makes even the base NeXT educational price look sick.

> Are we talking about the $3250 68040 NeXT?

Yes.

> You're going to need at
> least a 25MHz 486 to even be in the ballpark.

For what? What are you getting the machine for? As a personal UNIX box the
NeXTstation is short of the mark: it just doesn't have the disk space for
its Mach: it requires something like 30M of virtual memory right out of the
box for NeXTstep, plus the operating system executables and all the bitmaps
and there's not damn much left of that 100M disk.

> At a campus computer
> fair we had last week, I saw an IBM rep. demoing Word for Windows on
> IBM's Model 55SX.

Two mistakes in one sentence. I could care less for windows: I'm talking
about your basic UNIX box. Not quite so dependent on the crappy VGA display.
I'm also talking decent clones, not IBM junk.

> Anyway, let's set record straight, the 68040 smokes the 386(SX) and
> 68030.  It's probably better than the 486 too.  Intel's architecture
> has always been a generation behind Motorola's.

That's why the 486 has been out for months, and the 68040 is just beginning
to show up? The 486 and 040 are about the same speed integer, and the 040
is faster for floats. Ever since the 386 came out Motorola has been playing
leapfrog with intel.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.

farren@sat.com (Michael J. Farren) (03/07/91)

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com writes:
>Ever since the 386 came out Motorola has been playing leapfrog with intel.

Hell, ever since the 8080 came out Motorola has been playing leapfrog with
Intel.  It's almost become traditional - all those young men and women
waiting for the ball to come back over the net again, six months or a year
later...

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Michael J. Farren                                      farren@sat.com |
|                        He's moody, but he's cute.                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (03/09/91)

In article <1991Mar07.033612.20200@sat.com> farren@sat.com (Michael J. Farren) writes:
> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com writes:
> >Ever since the 386 came out Motorola has been playing leapfrog with intel.

> Hell, ever since the 8080 came out Motorola has been playing leapfrog with
> Intel.

Well, except for the period between when the 68000 came out and the 80386
came out. That is, most of the '80s.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.

jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Sheckel) (03/12/91)

peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>
>> You're going to need at
>> least a 25MHz 486 to even be in the ballpark.
>
>For what? What are you getting the machine for? As a personal UNIX box the
>NeXTstation is short of the mark: it just doesn't have the disk space for
>its Mach: it requires something like 30M of virtual memory right out of the
>box for NeXTstep, plus the operating system executables and all the bitmaps
>and there's not damn much left of that 100M disk.
>

Quite true.  About processor speed:  I'm running UNIX with X and Motif and
all that stuff on a supercheap (REALLY CHEAP) 16 MHz 386SX with 8MB RAM.  I
find that the processor is plenty fast enough.  It seems that for UNIX,
especially for a personal UNIX box, the disk performance is much more of a
limiting factor than processor speed.

About disk space: 100MB is simply not going to cut it for a modern UNIX
workstation, especially if you plan on doing any software development for a
GUI subsystem.  My UNIX/X/Motif/DevSys installation consumes about 60MB, and
when you add 20MB for swap space, you can see that 100MB is going to be a bit
tight.  If you want to run any useful software, like a desktop publishing or
spreadsheet package, you WILL need a bigger disk.
--
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | POLYGEN CORPORATION  | When I was young, I had to walk |
| Drummers do it... | Waltham, MA USA      | to school and back every day -- |
|    ... In rhythm! | (617) 890-2175       | 20 miles, uphill both ways.     |
+-------------------+----------------------+---------------------------------+
|           ...! [ princeton mit-eddie bu sunne ] !polygen!jerry             |
|                            jerry@polygen.com                               |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

dltaylor@cns.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dan Taylor) (03/14/91)

In <1002@stewart.UUCP> jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Sheckel) writes:

>Quite true.  About processor speed:  I'm running UNIX with X and Motif and
>all that stuff on a supercheap (REALLY CHEAP) 16 MHz 386SX with 8MB RAM.  I
>find that the processor is plenty fast enough.  It seems that for UNIX,
>especially for a personal UNIX box, the disk performance is much more of a
>limiting factor than processor speed.

At last! I've been suggesting the 'SX to people for UNIX, provided they
have enough (8 IS enough) RAM, a fast SCSI or ESDI disk controller, and
a FAST!!! VGA.  All a 33MHz '486 does is wait on I/O a lot faster than
the 16MHz '386SX (unless you do a LOT of floating point), 'specially on
an ISA (AT) bus.

Of course, NOW I can try to lead people to the A3000, instead.  All I
need is a catalog, like Sun has, with a decent listing of V.4/68K
canned applications (various DBMs, spreadsheets, etc.).  Has anybody
tried running a Motorola, Force, etc. V.3 application on an A3000?

Dan Taylor

melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (03/17/91)

In article <1002@stewart.UUCP> jerry@polygen.uucp (Jerry Sheckel) writes:

   peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
   >
   >> You're going to need at
   >> least a 25MHz 486 to even be in the ballpark.
   >
   >For what? What are you getting the machine for? As a personal UNIX box the
   >NeXTstation is short of the mark: it just doesn't have the disk space for
   >its Mach: it requires something like 30M of virtual memory right out of the
   >box for NeXTstep, plus the operating system executables and all the bitmaps
   >and there's not damn much left of that 100M disk.
   >

   Quite true.  About processor speed:  I'm running UNIX with X and Motif and
   all that stuff on a supercheap (REALLY CHEAP) 16 MHz 386SX with 8MB RAM.  I
   find that the processor is plenty fast enough.  It seems that for UNIX,
   especially for a personal UNIX box, the disk performance is much more of a
   limiting factor than processor speed.

   About disk space: 100MB is simply not going to cut it for a modern UNIX
   workstation, especially if you plan on doing any software development for a
   GUI subsystem.  My UNIX/X/Motif/DevSys installation consumes about 60MB, and
   when you add 20MB for swap space, you can see that 100MB is going to be a bit
   tight.  If you want to run any useful software, like a desktop publishing or
   spreadsheet package, you WILL need a bigger disk.

Then buy more disk space!!  The NeXT comes in either 105MB, 200MB,
400MB, or 660MB configurations.  Why buy a cheap Unix machine and
another "neat" computer when you can have everything in one box?

-Mike
  

rjc@geech.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) (03/17/91)

In article <sj2G.ph11@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
>Then buy more disk space!!  The NeXT comes in either 105MB, 200MB,
>400MB, or 660MB configurations.  Why buy a cheap Unix machine and
>another "neat" computer when you can have everything in one box?
>
>-Mike
>  
  I think the major point is, the NeXT's $3200 price tag for the 
smallest model is its biggest selling point. It's a marketing innovation,
but when one adds the cost of the extra hardware to make it a usable
machine (for personal use, not in a lab environment) the advantage is lost.

BTW, I have been reading lots of reports lately that several companies
are about ready to deliver 040 cards for the A3000 and A2000. The
A3000 cards seem to be priced at about $995 list. The A2000 card was
about $3000. (no doubt it has 8mb ram, a cache, scsi controller, and large HD)

So now you can buy an A3000-25/50($2500) and a GVP 040 card($995 list, probably
$700-800 street). Total $3200-3300

Check the April Amigaworld for more info. GVP, Supra, and PPS are gearing to
sell 68040 cards for the A3000/

 I hope Commodore produces a 68040 A3000. It would be cheaper than 
adding a card since Commodore has the bucks to by 68040's in large
quantities, and integrating it would drop the cost of the support
circuitry required for cards.

Even more interesting... I was at a book store yesterday purchasing
magazines. While I was browsing the video and computer sections, I noticed
the Video Toaster everywhere. It was being reviewed in Amazing, Camcorder
Magazine, Byte, Radio Electronics, and a few others. Sheesh, NewTek's
marketing is to be commended. I've never seen such Amiga coverage in
non-Amiga specific magazines.