HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mark@cyantic.com (Mark T. Dornfeld)
Subject: Re: New idea: forget Open Systems. N(o)T! (was Re: Open...)
Organization: CYANTIC Systems
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 13:07:11 GMT

In article <lao3fdINNkr1@aludra.usc.edu> malexand@aludra.usc.edu (Michael Alexander) writes:
>Backward-compatibility kills innovation! The acclaimed API-mania of OSs like
>NT carries on the barriers for new, innovative software producers to enter 
>the market. For example, the 4 DTP-packages for PCs which dominate now
>are likely to continue being the top-sellers on NT. 

Here, here.  Corporate computer buyers are scared stiff to take an
innovative approach for fear of increasing training costs and losing their
jobs for daring to buy from someone other than IBM ( er, Microsoft).
Implementation of technology must be done swiftly in order to benefit.

I used to work for a government corporation whose PC implementation
began in 1982 and they haven't even finished round one yet with over 200 of
their existing PC's now incapable of doing much by way of networking or
running robust software.  So they are now in a never-ending cycle of
upgrades while they waste talented people fixing DOS and WordPerfect
problems instead of getting on with some useful computing.

>The losers are the users who end up with "incrementalist" software, which
>can be characterized as >changed icon colors = major new release.< New
>approaches like NextStep in turn give way to new entrants, creating 
> competitive environments and therefore innovation. 

Implementation of new technology should be 'step-wise', rather than gradual.
The network should tie together different levels of technology to give
people access to required information.

Probably most significant in the corporate world is that few technology
decisions are made internally. FUD factors that emanate from the likes of
MS, and IBM and the false belief that the newest technology marketed by the
same is actually new, account for many 'decisions' in corporate America.

Does anyone think for oneself any more?
-- 

Mark T. Dornfeld                              Voice: (416) 234-9048
CYANTIC Systems                               Facsimile: (416) 234-0477
101 Subway Crescent Suite 2103                Email: mark@cyantic.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: jfr@glitter.RedBrick.COM ()
Subject: Re: Nextstep on NT  RUMOR CONTROL
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:15:30 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.203744.924@yvax.byu.edu> sean@digaudio.byu.edu writes:
>In article <RFANTA.92Sep10122537@newport.cea.berkeley.edu>  writes:
>
>[...referring to NeXTSTEP "being ported to NT"...]
>[munch]
>Microsoft has had a history of brutally smashing competitors for its  
>operating system market share.  

   Do you have any evidence to back up this statement?  I am no fan
   of Microsoft but I really do not see how this can be true.  Brutally
   smashing competitors?  WHICH COMPETITORS?  Digital Research?  Hey,
   DRI was the crew that blew the opportunity with IBM.  Microsoft
   was more than willing to team up with DRI and do the languages
   until Gary Kildall blew it.  UNIX?  Microsoft has helped to keep
   SCO alive while it was screwing up royally in the PC Unix market.
   If Microsoft wanted to see SCO fail, they certainly could have
   managed it sometime along the past eight years or so.  IBM?
   C'mon!  If Microsoft can be accused of "brutally smashing" IBM
   then the PC business certainly has come full circle.  Again, I
   think it was IBM that did the screwing up on OS/2 (and now seems
   to have regained some of its momentum).  So again, I challenge  
   you, where is the evidence of this claim?    

There is no way that Steve and Bill will  
>cut a deal or NeXTSTEP will port to NT, because NeXT is making deals with  
>Microsoft's biggest competitors (Novell, Lotus, WP, and... rumored...  
>Borland).  Call Bill whatever you may, but he understands how to make a  
>lot of money.  And that's not by selling out to the enemy.

   Microsoft has made deals with just about everyone at some point or
   other.  Remember the Microsoft/Apple deal?  It wasn't Microsoft
   that went to court crying about that deal, was it?  I don't think
   Bill Gates thinks ANYONE in the business is an "enemy", just good
   competition.  Microsoft certainly knows how to make a lot of money.
   By doing a good job (albeit not necessarily an *insanely great*
   job), and working with everyone you can to gain market share.
   That's just good business. 
>
>NT is out (alpha anyway) and Microsoft has never, in its history, made  
>deals with operating system or graphics-interface competitors of such a  
>magnitude, quality-wise, as NeXT.  And it never will.  That's good  
>business.  Immoral, but good business.

   BS.  Microsoft made a BIG deal with Apple, its principal graphics-
   interface competitor.  And even while squabbling in court, both
   companies continued to do business with each other.  The same with
   IBM.  I see no reason why Microsoft would not WELCOME a NeXTstep
   interface on top of NT.  Sure, it might cut into Windows sales (not
   that I think that would strike much fear in MS or BG), but it would
   certainly help NT grow and that is ultimately BG's long-term vision.
   Whether this is a good TECHNICAL idea for NeXT, I would seriously
   question.  It certainly seems like a good BUSINESS idea.
 
   Jon Rosen

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: songer@lexmark.com (Christopher Songer)
Subject: Re: NeXT RISC machine?
X-Disclaimer: These views are the poster's and not necessarily those of Lexmark
Organization: Lexington, KY
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:51:22 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.143516.2173@merrimack.edu> ieeesb@merrimack.edu writes:
>
>	I'm very interested in purchasing a high end NeXT system but I've
>heard rumors that NeXT is going to put out a RISC-based workstation using
>the Motorola 88110 with multiprocessing capabilties.  If this is true, does
>anyone have an estimate when?  I'd rather wait a year and buy a machine with
>more juice (for audio processing purposes) than to buy a NeXTstation Turbo
>only to end up selling it to get a better machine.  If anyone has any info
>on this matter, you can e-mail to the following address:
>

     I think this is a particularly interesting topic. Certainly the 88110
is a nice chip today, but the major vendors who were once considered to be
signed up for it have chosen other alternatives. Apple is going to go with
IBM and Ford (using them for embedded controllers) decided on an Intel
chip. The end result is that the 88110 is likely to retain a high cost
per unit and may be the end of its line. 

     What makes it even more interesting is the pending release of the Intel
P5 in 1Q 93. If Next does not change soon, NS486 on Intel hardware will be
the fastest offering of Nextstep available. On the other hand, if Next goes
to the 88110 and the 88xxx series ends there, they are stuck with another
architecture to support. (Can you say Sun386i? :) It will be interesting to
see what happens. 

     The issue is further complicated by motorola's traditional Intel lag.
The 68040 was released (if I recall correctly) over a year after the 486.
While the 040 performes a bit better, it's speed increase is nowhere close 
to the speed increase on gets in a new intel generation. 

So:

     Good question ... who knows ... Maybe NeXT will start making machines
based on Intel architectures. Maybe they'll wait for the 68060. Maybe they'll
adopt the 88110 and maybe they'll find another chip. The choice does not
seem too clear, but it is clearly a crucial one. It will be intriguing to
see how they solve this problem.

-Chris
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: ede978e@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Robert D. Nicholson)
Subject: Re: right brain?
Organization: Monash University, Caulfield Campus
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 05:02:37 GMT

As Glenn has said what is the point of bashing this even further?

You are being hypocrites in doing so. If you have a complaint then forward
it to them not the entire net, I personally feel RightBrain has done everything that they can to apologise for this incident - I will even go out on a limb and say we as owners of this (awesome machine) have a lot to thank RightBrain
and others for, without them this machine will not survive.  Whats been
the argument in the past (You guess it, No software!) 

Let's get on a talk about important issues, I think RightBrain has
learnt a very important leason from this episode.

I welcome any flames on this, since I won't answer them as I have a thesis
to get out the door.
From: jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Is Rick Rashid at Microsoft?
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:11:24 GMT
Organization: Dell Computer Co

david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George) writes:
>
>The confusion probably arises because Rick Rashid, who you'll all know as one
>of the 'authors' of Mach (no it wasn't Avie on his own !), and some other Mach
>guys are now working for Microsoft and no doubt bringing their Mach experience
>to bear.
>

Can somebody verify this?  I'm thinking somebody is just getting him
confused with Dave C., but I could be wrong...


jb


--
-- Jeff Bone ------------------------------------------------------------
      "Imagination is more important than knowledge."  - A. Einstein
------------------------------------------------------- jbone@dell.com --
                                                                       --
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: bill@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Bill Burris)
Subject: Re:   Nextstep on NT
Reply-To: bill@chaos.phys.ualberta.ca (Bill Burris)
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:56:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.155405.26578@pencom.com> ricardo@finn (Ricardo Parada)  
writes:
> In article <dillon.0nkt@overload.Berkeley.CA.US>  
> dillon@overload.Berkeley.CA.US (Matthew Dillon) writes:
> 
> >     Porting NeXTSTEP to OS/2 2.0 might be more doable, though.
> 
> Interesting, not that I think that it should be done but from what I've  
> read OS/2 is more Mach than windows NT.  Yes, more doable.
>  
Yes it would be easy to port, just demo it to OS/2 users and they
will reformat their hard drive and install NeXTSTEP 486.

Bill
From: glenn@rightbrain.com (Glenn Reid)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why doesn't RightBrain and others do this? (was: Re: PasteUp vs PageMaker vs Quark (RTF))
Date: 12 Sep 92 22:40:30 GMT
Reply-To: glenn@rightbrain.com

Glenn Reid writes

> No problem; we've programmed it so it won't send you any information
> even if you ask it to :-)

I've already gotten a flame about this, so I thought I'd better clarify.

I was just kidding, and put a smiley there to reinforce that.  I guess
I shouldn't kid about such things, and/or should use more smileys.
Sorry about that.

Sheesh.  From now on I'm not posting anything to the net.  I'll just
create a new directory on our file server called Glenn and put my postings
in there, and if anybody wants to read them, they can retrieve them from
the file server :-)

--
 File Server:      file-server@rightbrain.com
 Actual People:    info@rightbrain.com
 Phone Number:     415-326-2977 (2977 fax)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu
Subject: Re: Avoid RightBrain (was: Re: PasteUp vs PageMaker vs Quark...)
Organization: CAPVAX, JHU/APL
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 16:25:53 GMT

As long as we're in this thread, could someone who has the charter for each
of the comp.sys.next.* newsgroups be so kind as to email them to me?

Thanks.

Opinions expressed are my own.
_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_ _/      _/      _/ _/     _/   _/_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/  cfwaltrip     _/    _/_/    _/ _/_/    _/       _/     _/    _/ _/ _/    _/
_/       _/_/_/    _/  _/  _/  _/ _/_/_/   _/       _/     _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/  Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu>  _/       _/     _/  _/   _/ _/
_/_/_/_/ _/          _/      _/ _/      _/ _/_/_/_/ _/     _/    _/ _/ _/
From: malexand@aludra.usc.edu (Michael Alexander)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: New idea: forget Open Systems. N(o)T! (was Re: Open...)
Date: 7 Sep 1992 19:20:29 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

Backward-compatibility kills innovation! The acclaimed API-mania of OSs like
NT carries on the barriers for new, innovative software producers to enter 
the market. For example, the 4 DTP-packages for PCs which dominate now
are likely to continue being the top-sellers on NT. 

The losers are the users who end up with "incrementalist" software, which
can be characterized as >changed icon colors = major new release.< New
approaches like NextStep in turn give way to new entrants, creating 
 competitive environments and therefore innovation. 

Cheers,

**************************************************************************
*  Michael F. Alexander               University of Southern California  *
*  --------------------               Ma-Bel-Network:    (213) 955-0069  *
*  MVS:       malexan@mvsa.usc.edu    ---------------------------------  *
*  VM-Bitnet: malexand@uscvm.bitnet     "It's a window system named X,   *
*  UNIX:      malexand@chaph.usc.edu     not a system named X Window"    *
**************************************************************************
From: prim!dave@germany.eu.net (Dave Griffiths)
Subject: Re:   Nextstep on NT
Organization: Primitive Software Ltd.
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 18:38:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.205400.1@capd.jhuapl.edu> waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes:
>
>	Clarity's a good thing.  I'll try too 8^)
>
>	I distinguish between NT (the pre-emptive multi-tasking, microkernal
>	OS) and the various flavors of user interface (Windows, OS/2, POSIX,
>	DOS) that sits on top.  When I say NT is a nice piece of work done by
>	a top flight group of professionals, I refer to the OS and not the
>	UIs.  For someone used to NeXTSTEP, Windows probably does seem like a
>	piece of crap.  When I advocate porting NeXTSTEP to NT to avoid having
>	to use the Windows and other alternative UIs, I am NOT advocating
>	porting NeXTSTEP on top of Windows.  Instead, NeXTSTEP would be an
>	alternative UI built directly on top of the NT OS.
>

I'm sympathetic to your idea, but since we're looking for clarity here I
think you should explain how you envisage NeXTStep living alongside Windows
on NT. As you know, NT will have a Windows GUI and it is under this that the
majority of NT applications will run. Presumably your goal in porting NeXTStep
to NT is to be able to run all these Windows apps as well as NeXT apps
(otherwise what do you gain?). So how will NeXTStep live alongside the
Windows GUI? Presumably they both want total control of the screen? Do you
envisage a hot key to switch between the two environments? It's by no means
certain that this problem is solvable. It was done for X on the NeXT, but
only because the X source code is freely available. This won't be the case
for Windows on NT. Will NeXT modify _their_ stuff to use the Windows server?
(Ugh!)

What about the hard disk? Will NeXTStep and Windows be able to share the
same disk such that you can browse through the DOS filesystem under
WorkSpace manager and vice-versa? Printer support? Networking?

This is beginning to sound like a lot of work. I know that NeXT ported to
AIX and if that was possible maybe anything is, but NeXTStep and AIX both
had UNIX in common (filesystem, drivers, system calls could be shared) and
there was no alternative GUI.

If NeXTStep on NT takes over the machine and can't co-exist with Windows
on NT then you gain nothing and might as well save the bother and run raw
NeXTStep 486.

Dave Griffiths
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu
Subject: Re: Jack Reynolds Apologizes to the Net (RTF)
Organization: CAPVAX, JHU/APL
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:57:50 GMT

In article <875@rtbrain.rightbrain.com>, reynolds@rightbrain.com (Jack 
Reynolds) writes:

	[...an apology...]

I was not offended by Jack's post but understand the reasons some
were.  I found his apology gracious and I remember some of his posts
in the past where he was equally enthusiastic about products with
which he had no connection other than as a user but felt that they 
enhanced the productivity of the NeXT.  Therefore, I have no difficulty
in believing that Jack's post this time was founded in that same 
enthusiasm for NeXT.

I don't know Jack or Glenn and have no connection with RightBrain other
than as an appreciative reader of some of their posts.

Opinions expressed are my own.

_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_ _/      _/      _/ _/     _/   _/_/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/  cfwaltrip     _/    _/_/    _/ _/_/    _/       _/     _/    _/ _/ _/    _/
_/       _/_/_/    _/  _/  _/  _/ _/_/_/   _/       _/     _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/
_/  Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu>  _/       _/     _/  _/   _/ _/
_/_/_/_/ _/          _/      _/ _/      _/ _/_/_/_/ _/     _/    _/ _/ _/

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: modman@liveware.com
Subject: Re: Jack Reynolds Apologizes to the Net (RTF)
Keywords: Suggestions:  'NeXT to BOOZ' could be 'BOZO to NeXT'
Reply-To: modman@liveware.com
Organization: Liveware Corporation   Fort Collins, CO.  USA.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 09:12:44 GMT

In article <2048@ltb.ltb.bso.nl> wierda@ltb.ltb.bso.nl (Gerben Wierda) writes:
> 
> Blinded by love. The only version of blindness that is truly beautiful.
> 
> 
> -- 
> wierda@ltb.bso.nl (Gerben Wierda) || I speak for myself and not for my  
employer.
> (+31) 2154 84415/(+31) 35 833539  || Support the League for Programming  
Freedom!
> 	"If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there."
> 	(Almost from) Lewis Carroll, "Alice in Wonderland".

Somewhere there was a reference to how to handle large RTFs.  It is
indeed possible to put even RTFs out via an automagical autoreply
account.  That and the archives are great resources.  Please
use your best judgement (something Jack lacked at a particular
time in his life reciently ;') and post RTFs sparingly.

Regards,

Todd Nathan
csna modman
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: thomsen@spf.trw.com (Mark Thomsen)
Subject: Re: Is Rick Rashid at Microsoft?
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 19:02:27 GMT

Jeff Bone writes
> Can somebody verify this? (Rick Rashid at Microsoft).

Last I heard, including from Avie's lips at the Winter conference.

Mr. Cutler, one of the DEC geniuses back in the days when DEC was the
singularly hot place to be if you wanted to put great computers on
the street, is also at Microsoft. A fact that gives NT more
credibility in the technical domain is that this product will not be
limited to whatever Bill Gates thinks is good for an OS. This time
MS has brought in proven talent who have done more functional OSes.

One wonders if we will be getting the stripped down hot rod or the
"second systems effect" Brooks described in the Mythical Man Month. :)

Mark R. Thomsen
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: jfr@glitter.RedBrick.COM ()
Subject: Re: Rumor control (was Re: Open Letter: Don't get rid of UNIX
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 19:31:05 GMT

In article <BuE5oy.E2s@research.canon.oz.au> andy@research.canon.oz.au (Andy Newman) writes:
>jfr@glitter.RedBrick.COM writes:
>> And DOS was developed by Seattle Microcomputer (before BG bought them out
>> to sell it to IBM).  Not to mention the Mac OS which was developed by a
>> very small group of developers.
>
>Nearly correct....MS-DOS was orignally a clone of CP/M (with a
>different file system) and CP/M was essentially due to one person
>(Gary Kidall [sp?] ).
 
  Seattle DOS (the forerunner to MS-DOS) was indeed modelled after CP/M
  and was an attempt by Seattle Computer Products (the previous name was
  slightly wrong, I looked it up) to create an 8086 OS since Digital
  Research was so far behind in getting out CP/M-86 back in 1980.  When
  Gary Kildall (you needed the extra "l" :-) of DRI messed up with
  IBM in their attempts to license CP/M-86 for the IBM PC (his wife
  refused to sign IBM's non-disclosure agreement during early negotiations
  when Kildall was out of town), Gates at MS (who was already negotiating
  with IBM to do the languages for the PC) offered to do both the languages
  and the OS.  Gates knew of SCP's Seattle DOS and acquired it for $100K
  plus some future royalties (not enough, by my estimation :-).

  The legend is that when Microsoft's proposal was presented to the IBM
  senior management team at Boca Raton, John Akers asked: "Is that
  Mary Gate's son?" (Akers had been serving with Ms. Gates on some
  charitable foundation's board of directors, the United Way, I think).
  When the answer was affirmative, Microsoft was in.  

  Jon Rosen

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: nevin@dtint.dtint.com
Subject: Re: New idea ... (long)
Reply-To: nevin@dtint.dtint.com
Organization: Digital Technology, International
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 15:36:46 GMT

In article <jbone.716049711@splat> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
> Two little points of contention:
> 
> thomsen@spf.trw.com (Mark Thomsen) writes:
> >
> >Lots of Unix people (Unix in their classroom, Unix on their desk, ...) still
> >believe that they have the best development environment. They are, as many can
> >attest, way behind the power curve. Even with InterfaceBuilder and the many
> >reuseable components on NeXTSTEP, the best overall development environments are
> >on Symbolics and PCs. The rapid prototyping and construction of UI-intensive
> >apps on the NeXT is a huge leap over most Unix development stuff, but not all
> >that far ahead of the PC world.
> >
> 
> Okay, I'm only going to say this once:  I make my $$$ writing mission-critical
> IS systems.  Up until about 6 months ago, I did *exclusively* UNIX/X/TCP/IP/
> RPC/SQL type stuff.  TO MY UNDYING HORROR, I am now attempting to do similar
> on DOS gunga, using what is touted as a state-of-the-art application
> development environment for Windows.  I now wake up every morning simply
> ruing the day I was born. (ruing?  anyway... ;)  Point being, I have
> sat on both sides of that fence, and feel like I at least have an informed
> opinion to express.
> 
> FLAME ON:
> 
> [ lots of stuff deleted...]
> 
> --
> -- Jeff Bone ------------------------------------------------------------
>       "Imagination is more important than knowledge."  - A. Einstein
> ------------------------------------------------------- jbone@dell.com --
>                                                                        --

I agree with Jeff 100%.

I started out in the DOS world.  Went to work for a BIG financial services company (my  
previous employer) a few years ago-- had a SparcStation on my desk.  Wow-- what a  
difference!  The DOS world sucks, in my opinion (again, from a developer's point of  
view).  Too many problems in building REAL applications of any size.

Then I bought a NeXT.  Now I think the Sparc's are awful, and the DOS machines are  
absolutely horrible.

It seems that with the owner/boss of my previous company (the financial services company)  
just recently discovered what a computer is (previously, he probably just rode around in  
his limo and let his underdogs figure it out).  Anyway, guess what computer he seems to  
have discovered?  MS-DOS crap machines.  So, guess where the computer development has  
started to migrate towards?  The MS-DOS crap machines.

I switched employers.  Now I do NeXTSTEP development.

--
NeXTmail preferred!
-- 
---
root	                               root@dtint.dtint.com
Digital Technology Int.                (801)226-2984	
500 W. 1200 South, Orem UT, 84057      FAX (801) 226-8438
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy