From: nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu (Nathan F. Janette)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.misc
Subject: Re: Neuron (really networking NeXT vs. Mac)
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:44:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr9.174420.15689
Reply-To: nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT

In article <1992Apr9.125759.26341@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip  
McDunnough) writes:

[ More on Mac vs. NeXT for connectivity...]

> I wasn't going to respond to this but I just tried my Mac
> again after a year of it gathering dust and I had a couple of
> surprises. 
> >
> >A/UX is an extra-cost item for the Mac.  X-Windows is an
> >extra cost item for the NeXT.
> 
> Not much more for A/UX and it runs a lot of software. In
> particular it runs Textures which in its new version very
> impressive. It is essentially a WYSIWYG TeX! That is in
> one window you type your TeX code and in the other the
> output appears virtually immediately. No need to wait
> for a page to be done,etc...It is extremely nice. TeX on
> the NeXT is also very nice but it does not have this feature
> and it harder to set up with Postscript fonts, and in
> general,... 

X-Windows can be had *free* (public domain versions), or
with commercial support from Pencom (and others) for $249.

We have had no "set up" problems with TeX on the NeXT, and
I haven't seen many flamefests about it in these newsgroups.

> >Networking PC's requires extra-cost hardware and
> >software, and I've heard plenty of horror stories about
> >various PC network "solutions".
> 
> The hardware costs with software work out to under $400.
> No horror stories. It "just works" to quote someone.  

I'm glad it works for you, but that doesn't change the
fact the many users have had many troubles with various
PC networking solutions, and that many of them cost
thousands of dollars.

> >Networking the Next requires a different investment of
> >time and knowledge depending upon your needs.  It can be as
> >easy as attaching cables, powering up, and letting the
> >bundled tools autoconfig the new host.  Or, it can involve
> >some knowledge of unix networking. 
> 
> At the moment it seems to require some Unix
> administration knowledge. The NeXt, in general, seems
> far harder to use than the Mac when something goes wrong. 

It requires *no* more knowledge than any machine that you
wish to place on the same network.  The same level of
network information and administration would be required
by any machine: PC, Mac, unix box, etc.

The NeXT Netinfo system can make certain network tasks
much easier than other solutions.  This is not to say
Netinfo doesn't have other problems.

> >> I have to say this. As part of the connectivity issue the
> >> Mac has good communications' programs and
> >> faxmodems/sw. We have Neuron. I rest my case. 
> >
> >I have to say this: apples to oranges.  The Mac in generally
> >a single-user, single-process machine, and the NeXT is a
> >multi- user, multi-tasking machine.  The very nature of
> >the benefits of such mach/unix multi-tasking also makes
> >it difficult to use the same serial port for data and fax. 
> >I'm not about to give up the advantages of mach/next for
> >that one reason! 
> 
> Well A/UX 3.0 is multi-user, multitasking. Apple has
> reasonable prices for those who want colour. This is no
> longer the 50's. Why should we be paying over $5000 for
> colour on a Cube? Mach is not really used a great deal on the
> NeXT. If it were my 3 slots on the Cube would be doing
> something.

You certainly don't get the *same* color for the money on
those Macs!  That's 8-bit color for those prices, and
small displays. The NeXT's lowest color machine offered
is 12+4 bits with 17" displays: Apples to Oranges. 

I agree that NeXT overcharges for the cube.

I agree that Mach should support multiple CPU boards in
the cube.  However, the promise of multiprocessing is
certainly not the only reason for NeXT to use mach.

> cost of colour is too high, the OD and ND( the reasons for
> NeXT to exist in a sense) have been dealt with in an odd
> way,etc...

I agree that the OD and ND have been dealt with in an
odd way, and I and others have discussed (and yes, flamed
about) these issues to many NeXT folks.  However, they
are certainly not the only reasons for NeXT to exist.
NeXT has and continues to innovate in other important
areas.

--
Nathan Janette		"I'm a NeXTstep man,
Dept MB&B, Yale Univ	 I'm a NeXTcube guy"
New Haven, CT
nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu (NeXT)