HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mike@maths.tcd.ie (Mike Rogers)
Subject: Re: Mac vs. NeXT (was Mac Multitasking?)
Organization: none
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:05:27 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.011936.3923@athena.mit.edu>, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) wrote:
>Motorola:  Has not produced any new chip lines since the 68040, which is 
>           already almost two years old.  The 88110 series is almost dead.
>           There are no companies that I am aware of that plan to use that
>           "buggy" chip in their future systems (even NeXT has given up on 
>           them).  End result:  Motorola is in trouble.  They are two years
>           behind Intel in chip design.  They are even further behind

Yes, but they're ahead of Intel in geosynchronous satellite comms.

Your point?
-- 
Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,##EveryoneHasTheRightToFreedomOfOpinionAndExpressio
TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>##nThisRightIncludesFreedomToHoldOpinionsWithoutInt
###############################erferenceAndToSeekReceiveAndImpartInformationAndI
deasThroughAnyMediaAndRegardlessOfFrontiers...#10 UN Declaration of Human Rights
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: RE: Mac multitasking?
From: goblec@physc1.byu.edu
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:24:20 -0700
Distribution: world
Organization: Brigham Young University

>> NeXT is the only system available that supports display 
>> postcript.
>
> I know

Not true.  Even the most disgusting GUI of all time, openlook,
supports a NEWS server that has display postscript.  Likewise
the OS for Silicon Graphics machines has display postscript.
From what I understand NEWS is available for all major 
workstations.  Unfortunately most workstation programs seem
to aim and the least common denomenator in user interface.
Sort of like Dos before Windows.

__________________________________________________________________

Clark Goble                      Logic merely sanctions the 
goblec@theory.byu.edu            the conquests of intuition.
__________________________________________________________________


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 18 Dec 92 15:34:20 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <1992Dec16.032817.21440@watson.ibm.com>  writes:

>"OS/2 is a good showing"
>What part of IBM are you not impressed with?  The Mainframes and Minis?   
The
>join venture with Apple is not going to develop either.  The RS/6000's 
>architecture is what the PowerPC is going to be based on; I would  
consider 
>THAT the model for expectations from Taligent and the joint venture.


The RS/6000.  Could cost more than an HP, but is it as good?
The PC.  Need I say more?
AIX.  ick.

I have little experience with the mainframe/mini world (the AS/400 and  
up), and perhaps this is where IBM can really make some good stuff.  But  
in the market that Taligent is dealing with here (workstations on down),  
IBM has never made innovative stuff.  Except OS/2, which is not bad.


IBM
>Research is a big organization, and I have seen some amazing things come  
out
>of it.  Why the pessimism?


My worry is that as IBM gets in deeper and deeper trouble (it's laying off  
more people this year), Apple will be footing more and more of the  
Taligent offering.

..not that that would be bad or anything.  :-)


--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 14 Dec 92 05:12:31 GMT
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.

In article <1992Dec12.074448.12678@athena.mit.edu> zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>>(b) The NeXT was not designed so from teh ground up, as one of its major
>>    components (Mach) was just not designed for the NeXT; NeXT built
>>    on a pre-existing foundation. However well they did it it, your
>>    assertion isn't right. Interestingly, the MacOS ->was<- designed
>>    from the ground up. (solidly is annother thing); does this help
>
>Wrong.
>Carnegie Mellon University developed Mach with the aid of NeXT.  Carnegie
>Mellon now owns around 5% of NeXT computer.

Even so, Mach's principal architect, Avie Tevanian, is director of
Sysetm Software or some such at NeXT.  NeXT has made many
modifications to mach.

However, regardless of what mach was designed for, it remains a really
killer kernel.  It is without question one of the best kernels out
there.  Mach is in no way a disadvantage to NeXTSTEP, and is one of
it's greatest strengths.

>Eric


andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com      |  "C++'s runtime sucks shit!  Virtual functions
Andrew Loewenstern       |   can go straight to hell!"  - Ron Pomeroy
Cube Technologies, Inc.  |                   ForYourEyesOnly public key:
0000000701B61D1ADF0DFC9C16185CEA055200000007EB4A9FEB1922065D471A89E905B5
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: Mac Flaws
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: Masticating Illini
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 02:17:39 GMT

goblec@physc1.byu.edu writes:

> Flaws in the Mac
> ----------------

In general, this is well thought out, and accurate, in contrast to 
many of the articles posted here.  However, there are a few comments 
which could be made.  I pretty much agree with anything I didn't
comment on.

> 4) SECURITY

>    The security that is available for file serving should be
>    put on the Mac itself.  It would be very nice to have a
>    password on the Mac as an option with the same interface I
>    use when publishing folders.  ie. have an optional password
>    with the same users as those in my network CDEV.  If a
>    guest logs on directly he may not be able to see everything
>    on the disk.  Here too there are 3rd party products that
>    do the job, but it would be nice if it were standard on
>    all Macs.

The Mac is a personal computer, not a workstation.  If you want user
accounting on a Mac, the best thing to do is run A/UX.  A mac running
A/UX is much more comparable to a NeXT anyway, since it gains things
like premptive multitasking (sadly, not between Mac applications, 
however) that stem from the NeXT's UNIX roots.

> 6) MODAL DIALOGS

>    Yes Inside Mac says don't have Modal Dialogs unless you 
>    have a command that needs done immediately.  Unfortunately
>    most publishers seem to ignore that rule.  Microsoft is
>    of course the biggest offender, but your own open file
>    dialog box is just as bad.  Why must I have a modal window
>    to open files?  Am I not just sending an 'open' apple
>    even to the program?  Under the finder I can send open
>    even after open event.  Why not in the open dialog box?
>    There needs to be more pressure put on companies to
>    get rid of modal dialog boxes as well.

Sadly, this is probably impossible to write into the OS without
breaking many/most current applications.

> 10) DOCUMENT BASED COMPUTING

>    This final item really couldn't be done under the MacOS.
>    It may be done under some other OS.  Here the basic
>    element of work is not the application, but rather the
>    document.  You could have paper documents ala page-
>    layout and word processing.  You could have cards,
>    spreadsheets and lists.  There would be different
>    tools to apply to the document.  A text tool would 
>    have many word-processing functions.  A graph tool
>    would do graphs.  A math tool could do equations,
>    spreadsheet function and other such functions.  A paint
>    tool would draw pictures.

I'd love to find this one on any computer.  I think Newton
can do something like this, but I've yet to see this on any
sort of a desktop computer.  Sadly, we're all probably too
entrenched in standards for a new operating system like this
to take hold.
-- 
Thomas Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  "My friends, no matter how rough the road may be, we can and we will,
   never, never surrender to what is right."       
   -- Vice President Dan Quayle, in a speech to the Christian Coalition
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 20 Dec 92 19:58:31 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <b-c2at-@rpi.edu>, johnsd2@vccnw02.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
> I dont know of MPW can compile in the background. THINK C and Pascal
> can NOT do so, but the ability can be added with an extension. (still doesn't
> work that well tho. It needs tuning.)

MPW Compiles in the background. (Linking can get kind of spastic)

THINK C and Pascal COULD compile in the background, except that they use
modal dialog boxes during the compile process. (Grrr.)

-- 
Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958
Principal Software Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QO
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcoleman
POB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   ! Internet: bcoleman%hayes@uunet.uu.net
Disclaimer: "My employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."
Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve Hackett.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 17:37:30 GMT

In article 2243@athena.mit.edu, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>I failed to mention another "concrete example" of the magic of object
>oriented technology in my last post.  
>
>NeXTstep 3.0 supports drag and drop color onto text objects.  Therefore,
>the color of text on the screen (an object) can be changed by simply
>dragging a color from the color panel and dropping it onto the text.
>NeXTstep 2.0 did not support this feature.  However, when you upgrade to
>3.0, the text object gets upgraded, and all programs that use text will
>support drag and drop color onto text.  All programs will take advantage
>of this feature by simply upgrading your OS. 
>

That's annother nice feature, which works if (and only if) the
programs use the standard text object (or a derivative of it,
right?)

Same trick could be done (but has not been done) for the Mac, which
has a something vaguely similar (text-edit thingies can be handled
by the system, and it can add features to them)

However, since Mac programs can't really extend the thing for their
own use, they basically dont use it for any serious text editing- it
has a size limit of 32k and just isn't very exciting. :/ So in Real Life
(tm), the Mac can't do this this trick consistently.

But that's not object-orientation. That's a lame text-edit thingy. :)

>In article <-ch2rl_@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib104.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>>>Eric Hermanson Writes:
>>>Draw a cirle on your Mac screen.  Then draw a tangent to that circle, as best
>>>you can, without zooming in.  Do the same thing on a NeXT (built in display 
>>>postcript).  You will find that the tangent is correct when printet out on
>>>the NeXT 100% of the time.  On the Mac, the tangent is off.
>>
>>Really? How does the NeXT do that? How does it knwo I meant 'make this tangent'
>>and not 'make this almost, but not quite tangent'? Does it assume that
>>if anything is drawn near-tangent to a circle, it should make it all-the-way
>>tangent?
>>
>>Just exactly what does Display Postscript do here?
>>
>
>Postcript code is sent to the screen AND to the printer.  If the tangent
>touches the circle on the screen , it will absolutely touch the circle
>when printed out.
>

Ah, I see!

What if it is not-touching by 1/2 a (Screen) pixel?

That is the sort of thing that will trip a Mac up in my experience.
(then again, I basically never use postscript, so perhaps the laserwriter
driver does a lousy conversion job and I just dont know it. But I dont
quite see why such a simple conversion should be done wrong.)
---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@lib111.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Reply-To: johnsd2@lib111.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 05:10:53 GMT

In article 5256@athena.mit.edu, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>In article <TOMSTER.92Dec14172253@bigwpi.WPI.EDU> tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble) writes:
>
>>Now, two questions:
>>
>>	1)	Can the NeXT use *any* postscript-compatible printer,
>>or just a few?  I would hope the former.
>
>NeXT can print to *any* postcript printer, automatically.  Postscript is
>a standard that NeXT adheres to.  Mac does not adhere to this standard.

umm, I believe the LaserWriter driver will drive any postscript printer
also. Although we still haven't settled whether it works properly. :(
So maybe it can't. But _in theory_ anyway, it can. Ill leave it at that
until we finish our flam.. uh argument. :)

Beyond that saying that "Mac does not adhere to this standard" is like
saying "NeXT does not adhere to the QuickDraw standard" or "the NeWS standard"
or whatnot- so long as the output comes out right, the internal engine
doesn't matter that much. Last I checked, Display Postscript wasn't
a "standard" except in that it was _standardized_; but it isn't
widespread or widely accepted. If we wanted a standard internal
graphics engine it would probably have to be X. (yech!)

>>
>>	2)	Can the NeXT use any other printer *besides* a
>>postscript laser?  Like, just dump the image to the other printer as a
>>bitmap instead of a postscript data file.
>
>There are drivers written for some of the most popular non-postcript printers
>so that NeXT may print to them.
>

It can also do PostScript imaging internally, right?

I do like that touch.

---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Distribution: world
From: Daniel_A._Chirkov@fourd.com
Organization: 4th Dimension BBS
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:10:13 EST
Subject: Re: Mac Flaws

>>A text tool would 
   have many word-processing functions.  A graph tool
   would do graphs.  A math tool could do equations,
   spreadsheet function and other such functions.  A paint
   tool would draw pictures.>>

Claris Works and other "works" type programs attempt to accomplish this.

********************************************************************
System: fourd.com                                Phone: 617-494-0565
Cute quote:  Being a computer means never having to say you're sorry
********************************************************************
From: CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: illegal mac emulation
Date: 21 Dec 92 02:53:40 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

There is an Amiga product called EMPLANT that allows you to emulate
a MACII on an Amiga if you have a copy of the roms on a file in your HD or on a
 disk. The product itself has a simm slot so you can copy a MACII rom sim onto
a disk to use this emulation product. isn't this illegal? Shouldn't Apple know
about this? If so who should I contact? This product promotes the piracy of
the Apple OS. I believe it should be stopped.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wondertr@fraser.sfu.ca (wondertree learning center)
Subject: Re: why apple and ibm will win
Keywords: apple ibm pink talgent microsoft
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:51:14 GMT

matoh@lysator.liu.se (Mats \hrman) writes:

>wondertr@fraser.sfu.ca (wondertree learning center) writes:

>>A very interesting note on the Microsoft-DEC alliance isa that the
>>person heading the development of NT's was the same person who 
>>responsible for the development of DEC's VMS operating system
>>(his name escapes me right now)

>Well, haven't you noticed that VMS++ = W(indows)NT?
>(V+1=W, M+1=N, S+1=T) 

>"Windos NT - takes VMS one step further!" Yeacch...
NO I hadn't noticed that.... is that like HAL being one step behind IBM

TED

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
From: nathans@pacifier.rain.com (Nathan Silva)
Subject: Re: Mac & IBM Info-Version .90
Organization: Pacifier BBS
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 11:27:15 GMT



As a PC user, I'd like to clarify a few of the points in your article.

To be fair, Macs should be compared with GUI-equipped PCs, such as
Windows or OS/2 PCs (apples vs. apples?).  There's no point in
comparing a Mac with a bare-bones, character-based OS like DOS.  So I
will address these points as they pertain to a standard Windows 3.1
PC.

>Network Software: Novell Netware, Banyan Vines, DECNet, Windows/Work Groups
>Each of the MS-DOS networking schemes are, in general, totally incompatible 
>with the others. Once you have chosen one, you are pretty much locked-in to 
>that product line from then on.  Novell Netware is the biggest, especially in 

Generally true.  However, MS worked hard to make Windows for Work
Groups work with Novell.  I have WFWG and can transparently connect to
both WFWG and Novell resources.

>Network Printing is not controlled by the system; it is mostly implemented by 
>the actual program, therefor performance varies from one software program to 

The standard method is for the network software to map network
printers to a local printer port.  Most programs use a network printer
exactly as if it were a local printer.  The network handles the
spooling and queueing.

>is active right now. According to Jawdat "under DOS each piece of software 
>needs its own printer drivers, which have been fairly standardized." {Could 
>somebody explain how this is standardized and why MicroSoft has not written 
>its own standard print drivers to save HD space? I am confused.}

Yes, under *DOS*, each program needs its own driver.  Hence the packet
of "driver" disks you get when you buy a DOS program.

Windows, on the other hand, supports standard drivers.  No program
needs its own print drivers.  Windows comes with drivers for all major
printers; other drivers are available from manufacturers.

>Mac 7.0: {Maybe} Apple has System 7.0 running off Intel Chips and is looking 
>         at making this version available for IBM. {Another wait & see} 

Very Interesting!  I hope it happens.

In general, with Windows, PC software has become somewhat
standardized (I'm referring here to the use of standard drivers and
APIs).  However, there is an appalling lack of hardware standards,
since no one vendor controls it (definitely not IBM).  But, with an
appropriate driver, most hardware can work with Windows.

There is still a lot of ignorance among some PC'ers.  I've spoken with
people who think that Windows was the first GUI (ever), and who don't
believe that a Mac can multitask!  One person was shocked to see a
screen shot of a Mac and said "you mean they have Windows for the Mac,
too?"

Nathan

-- 
 -------------------------------------------
| Nathan Silva                              |
| nathans@pacifier.rain.com                 |
 -------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:02:14 GMT

In article <TOMSTER.92Dec14172253@bigwpi.WPI.EDU> tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble) writes:

>Now, two questions:
>
>	1)	Can the NeXT use *any* postscript-compatible printer,
>or just a few?  I would hope the former.

NeXT can print to *any* postcript printer, automatically.  Postscript is
a standard that NeXT adheres to.  Mac does not adhere to this standard.

>
>	2)	Can the NeXT use any other printer *besides* a
>postscript laser?  Like, just dump the image to the other printer as a
>bitmap instead of a postscript data file.

There are drivers written for some of the most popular non-postcript printers
so that NeXT may print to them.


Eric


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB)
Subject: Mac Color was Re: Mac & IBM Info (added Info)
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:06:57 GMT

jbailey@world.std.com (jim bailey) writes:
>It's software.  It's in the os. [talking about 32-bit quickdraw]
>Why not say "All macs support 24 bit
>colour images" and instead say "Mac os includes '32 bit color
>quickdraw' which lets software which makes standard os graphics calls
>display in whatever bit depth it wants, with the os dithering if
>necessary."  and then go on to explain the actual hardware issue from
>the hardware standpoint?
If anybody had bothered to read the newest posting of Mac & IBM Info 
(Version .90) you would know that 32-bit quickdraw is in the OS
for the old 8-bit color machines (SE/30, II, IIX, and IIcx) ONLY
and in the ROM on "All present Macs except the Classic and Powerbook 100"

Last time I checked ROM chips were part of HARDWARE and not considered
part of the OS.  So, there are not graphics calls to the OS but to the
ROM. {BIG difference}  By having 32-bit quickdraw in ROM apple will have
three OS runing on their machines (System 7.0, AU/X 3.0, PowerOpen(AU/x 4.0))
WITHOUT having each OS containing the 32-bit quickdraw commands.

Also the reference for those people who STILL think I do not know what
I am talking about is MacUser Special 1993 page 28-29

The key word in all postings was SUPPORT not display.  Try this take a
32-bit picture and edit on it on a display with only 8-bit color
display, now save it.  On a Mac it can STILL be saved as 32-bit color picture
and the colors can be seen on a machine that can DISPLAY 32-bit color

Here is the info from Mac & IBM Info-Version 1.0 (Out in Jan 1993)
...32-bit color QuickDraw allows an almost transparent capability to display 
and edit X-bit images in Y-bit color (Where X and Y are 1, 2, 4, 8, or 32 in 
any combination) reguardless of monitor resolution {63 dpi (12" color) to 
80 dpi (full page grey)}.  This means that even though you can use only 256 
or 32,768 of the colors at a time, all 16,777,216 colors are still avalible 
and are simulated at lower resolutions by dithering. (This is the reason 
for CLUTS, so the program knows which set of colors to use with a picture 
and what 32-bit colors the dithers really are.) 

More evidence of the need for my list.