From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: Mac vs. NeXT (was Mac Multitasking?)
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:38:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.231636.522@athena.mit.edu> mflafeer@athena.mit.edu (Mohamed F. Lafeer) writes:
>I don't want you NeXT guys to think that I don't understand that there are
>advantages to NeXTstep. It does have some really neat features. But those
>features are not as dramatic as the advantage that Mac had over MS-DOS in
>1987-88 that made the Mac as accepted as it is today.

You may believe that there are some advantages to NeXTSTEP, but it isn't
clear if you know what they are.

>I agree that the NeXT is great. But now that I am going into the real world
>I have to make decisions based on more than just "get the best." 

That's true. Here's your chance to get mediocre but popular equipment.
If you're not going to get the best, why not get a DOS box?

>Buying a Mac and buying/developing Mac software means more flexibility than
>NeXT. Mac software runs on cheap computers, computers with big monitors and
>68040s, and computers that weigh 4lbs and fit in a briefcase.

So what? DOS software runs on cheap computers, computers with big
monitors (what a silly example), 486's and notebooks. Does that make it
better?

>The Mac market is large. It is fed by hundreds of companies. It is not as
>large as the PC market, but it is large enough to be stable and trustworthy.
>Macs are not just found in advertising firms any more, they have found a 
>place in every segment of the computer industry. 

Everything you say applies to DOS. Wouldn't you be happy with the
sales leader?

>NeXT is a small privately owned company. It does not have any significant
>partners. Apple is a large, publicly-held company with a known stable financial
>situation. Apple has significant dealings with another pair of large, stable,
>publicly held companies, Motorola and IBM.
>

Canon and Ross Perot aren't financially stable? IBM is? 25000 more layoffs
coming up. That's stable?

>Who knows exactly what will happen in the computer market in the next few
>years? All of this talk about NS486 sales, PowerOPEN, and Taligent are purely
>speculation. The bottom line is that I need to solve certain business needs
>for a certain set of small companies. Buying a Quadra to develop software
>for a network of smaller, cheaper, Macintoshes makes sense for our company.
>And it seems to me that Macs (and to an even greater degree PC's) make more
>sense for more companies than buying a network of $6000 - $7000 NeXT machines.
>

This makes sense. If you don't need a NeXT, don't buy one. However, if you
don't need a Mac, don't buy one. That's why people buy useless DOS boxes.
They look at what they need today, not what they can do tomorrow.

>In summary, I do not share your optimism about the future of NeXT in the
>mainstream of computer users and purchasers. I think that MS-DOS, Windows, and
>MacOS, and future derivatives of these systems are the present and future
>mainstream. This is not to say that these OSes are better than NeXT or even
>as good as NeXT. These are just market realities.
>.

I hope NeXT never goes mainstream. Mainstream means an inability to innovate.
Your user base is too large and they don't want change. Mediocrity sets in.

Terry Wilcox



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy