HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Holcomb)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:34:39 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu (Douglas Taylor) writes:
:  You know, at least the Amiga users bother to read the competition's mail be-
: 	fore making stereotypical remarks; obviously, you cannot say the ame
: 	about yourself.  And, as a side note, I can do everything I want on
: 	my Amiga; from running Mac applications, to IBM applications, to Amiga
: 	applications, all at the same time... thanks to EMPLANT, ATOnce Plus,
: 	and, of course, CBM.
: 

Can you run System 7.0+ and QuickTime and Adobe Photoshop, and get 8, 16, or
24-bit color using your Mac emulation?  Or are you limited to MacPlus
compatible programs?  My impression about all the Mac emulators I've read about
is that you can, at best, emulate a MacPlus and you get the same dinky little
screen for displaying the interface.  I find MacPluses to be mostly inadequate
for doing any serious work on a Macintosh platform, partly because of the small
screen size, partly because it is slow, and partly because System 7.0 is not
available for the MacPlus.

Dave Holcomb
holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
From: wrob@unixg.ubc.ca (Robert Wong)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 26 Jan 1993 09:29:14 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <1k2227INNq4r@shelley.u.washington.edu> tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>>NeXT has been using SCSI-II since 1989.  
>
>That's a pretty good trick, considering that the SCSI-2 specification was
>still in a massive state of flux in 1989.
>
>--Tim Smith

NeXT hardware has a SCSI-II CONNECTOR, but it runs/uses SCSI-I.
 RWW.

-- 
Robert W. "What!?! I've-been-tying-my-shoelaces-backwards-all-my-life?" Wong Jr.
wrob@unixg.ubc.ca (ASCII only)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: PC, MAC or Amiga?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 19:32:57 GMT

I agree with your post for the most part, but I do have troubles with a
few parts:

PC APPS:  In a few areas Windows still has a serious lack of applications as
          compared to a Mac.  The quality of many of them is lower IMHO.

PC OS's:  You forgot/neglected to mention OS/2, but that is just as well.
          We just got a LOAD of 386's running OS/2.  It takes FOREVER to
          launch Word or Excel.  User interface feedback is HORRIBLE (a
          watch cursor would be nice).  Besides this the interface is
          confusing to Windows and Mac fanatics alike.

MAC HW:   There is a plethora of hardware available for the Macs, though
          not as great as the PC.  I have friend with 3rd part monitors,
          printers, scanners, modems, etc.  They all have had just as
          Actually, there are several programs that offer shell type
          abilities for the Mac.  MPW (Apple's own programming enviroment)
          provides a CLI shell with programmable dialogs and menus.  It
          doesn't allow for "lpr `Word < my_file | Excel`", but it does
          have many UNIX equivalents known as tools that can be used in
          scripts.  UNIX tools such as bison, flex, etc have been ported
          to it.  With these tools you can do piping and redirecting, file
          manipulations, etc.  Recently, (1-2 years ago?) UserLand has
          come out with Frontier, a program for controlling other programs
          using scripts, via Apple Events.  Both MPW and Frontier are not
          free, but the average user doesn't want/need them anyway.

Jess Holle
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: kocks@leland.Stanford.EDU (Peter Kocks)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 17:18:06 GMT

In article <hdq3sqg@rpi.edu>, johnsd2@vccnw07.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:


|> >>>If I delete a bunch of resources from the Macintosh System file, I
|> >>>will have to replace it.  Is that a weakness in Macintosh?  no.
|> >>
|> >>Nope. Because it is not possible for a casual use to do this;
|> >>it requires extra software. Software Joe Novice User will not
|> >>have; software that screams "You are about to die!" whenever
|> >>you try to touch the System file anyway, just in case some
|> >>poor fool novice DID get his hands on it.

This whole thread is just a litte nuts.  To compare the NeXT and the
Mac based on how easy it is to muck up the os is largely irrelevant since
both are easy to muck up.  On the NeXT you can go to root and delete stuff.
On the Mac you can put in any number of inits or extensions that will
cause all sorts of problems.  It is true that any os should try to
prevent the user from doing breaking stuff.  On the NeXT they have specail tools for
the root user.  If you use them, you should be ok.  If you do things
by hand, on the command line, you may not be.   On the Mac, changing system
files requires a high level of expretise.  However, a tool (like an init)
created by a Mac expert can totally mess things up for the general
user who uses that tool.

I know of at least one Mac user who could not print on their Mac for
4 months until someone told them to boot the machine while holding
the shift button down.  This keeps extensions from loading and now
printing works.  Incidently, the person does not have the time to
go into more detail about this problem and ALWAYS boots with the
shift button down.  

--Peter Kocks
  kocks@chemistry.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: tinsel@uiuc.edu (Thomas Aaron Insel)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Originator: tai50080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Reply-To: tinsel@uiuc.edu
Organization: Masticating Illini, Urbana Illinois
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:29:27 GMT

sircomp@bcarh289.bnr.ca (Brian Magee) writes:

> If only NeXTSTEP ran on these beautiful machines <drool>
> But wasn't there some rumor that NT would be on SGI machines? <ick, sigh>

If only SGI's Irix and GL ran on affordable machines like NeXT's.
-- 
Thomas Insel (tinsel@uiuc.edu)
  "All television is children's television." -- Richard P. Adler
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@jec315.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec315.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:26:18 GMT

In article 1jq1p6INNfml@skeena.ucs.ubc.ca, wrob@unixg.ubc.ca (Robert Wong) writes:
>In article <f-k39qq@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib102.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>[whoops, I munched the other guy!]
>>>  As a regular user of NeXT, you will NEVER need to
>>>log in as root.
>>
>>Unless you want to change your login tiff. :)
>>
>>But what about the poor fool system administrators? Why should
>>they want a delicate system?
>
>Perhaps I should try and clarify the issue of the login TIFF.  When the 
>sysadmin changes the login tiff, everyone who logs in to the system will have
>this new login tiff.
>
>The changing of the login tiff is not a system-supported operation.  You 
>change it at your own risk.

Ow.

Ok, I do see where you are coming from, and it does make
some sence, but I disagree with this philosophy.

This essentially says: "This bit of the computer shall not be used,
penalty for illicit usage being the chance of mucking your computer
up."

If this is so, don't bother putting the feature in at all, because
some of the users will try to use it, and some will screw up.

If, on the other hand, the feature is actually there for people to use,
then it should be done in as solid a way as possible. There is no
benefit gained from this failure to log in! No power is accrued this
way! You might as well make the system recover from human errors when
it can. Because humans DO make the errors, even Wonderous System
Admins With the Root Password, never mind Ordinary Joe Single
User Types with the Root Password.

---
			- 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.
From: 1k1mgm@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (Christopher Gunn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Grumblings about Mac performance
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:06:47 GMT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <C1FC97.65o@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Brian Hughes) writes:
> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:
> [...] and Microsoft is trying to beat
> out Claris' bid for worst Vaporware product in history with Windows NT
> which they are now saying may be out in a trimmed down version by the
> summer. I wouldn't call this goo marketing.
                               ^^^
I dunno;  seems as good a term for it as any....

Christopher Gunn	Molecular Graphics and Modeling Lab
SPAN--KUPHSX::GUNN	Department of Medicinal Chemistry, Malott Hall
913-864-4428 or -4495	University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS  66045
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jrg@punch (James R. Goble)
Subject: Re: NeXTstep for PowerPC --- THE ONLY CHOICE
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation; El Segundo, CA
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:07:50 GMT


> As of today, NeXTstep is the crown jewels of the computer  
industry...there is
> no disputing that...Taligent can release all the specs it wants...rumors  
can 
> fly...Mac fanatics can sing its praises...but the fact remains...the  
market is 
> a long ways away from seeing it...
> 
> Technological unity is the only thing that can save the consumer, the 
> developer, and the manufacturer...
> 
> Getting companies to work together...well, that's a much different  
story...
> (but hey, if Apple and IBM can cooperate, I imagine just about anyone  
can!)
> 
> 
> Later,
> Rob
> 
> rawyatt@scf.usc.edu

Let me see if I understand the gist of your statement Rob.  You like  
NextStep.  Effusive praise aside, NextStep does seem to be the OS that is  
closest to "The Right Thing".  I used it to write my thesis and to control  
the SGI I used for number crunching. (I agree SGI's are wonderful  
creatures, but I found the OS they use somewhat clunky.)  Now let me pose  
a question for discussion.  What parts of the Mac System would everybody  
like to see ported to NextStep?  
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: kaya@world.std.com (Kaya Bekiroglu)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:56:53 GMT

In article <16B5ED7F6.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (M.Eaton) writes:
>In article <C18w8M.HK6@cuug.ab.ca>
>wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
> 
>>
>>In article <1993Jan17.190441.9736@netcom.com> bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>>
>>>
>>>If you're just starting out with computer equipment, buy Macintosh
>>>hardware.  If you already have a considerable investment in MS-DOS
>>>software, then get 486's and DOS/Windows, OS/2, or Windows NT.  If you
>>>want a neat machine and you don't feel a need to worry about it
>>>becoming obsolete (this isn't a worry in some cases), then try
>>>NextStep 486.
>>
>>If you're buying 486's, why not run NeXTSTEP 486? If you don't like it,
>>put DOS/Windows on instead. Why would your NS486 machine become obsolete
>>when the same machine running DOS/Windows wouldn't? They're the same
>>hardware.
>>
>Are you kidding?!?! Have you really got a thousand bucks laying around
>to _try_ some hack OS that you're not sure will run your apps? Or
>should we all trust you that we have to have this thing?

And God said, 'This sucks.'  And so he proceeded to fashion 
dealerships of every kind and sort under the sun, and demo
copies, trade magazines, and beta software.  And so was 
created the personal computer industry, and it was good. 

> 
> 
>>
>>Terry Wilcox
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Mark Eaton                    |
>UC525655@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU |             Eat at Joe's.
>                              |


-- 
Kaya Bekiroglu - "Don't mind him, he's just crazy"
kaya@world.std.com
[If you're looking for something witty and amusing here, then
congratulations, you've just found it]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: aggie@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu (I R A Aggie)
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Organization: An Ol Ag surrounded by a bunch of unfriendly Seminoles
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 03:45:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.191238.3514@athena.mit.edu>, zmonster@athena.mit.edu
(Eric M Hermanson) wrote:

[I ask about the NeXT mouse:]
> >No, the second is usually redundant. How many app's actually use
> >the second one?? And then there's the X window's apps. How do they
> >map *three* buttons into two? [I don't know, we don't have any
> >X stuff on our NeXTs]

> First of all, if configured in Preferences, the second button on the NeXT
> mouse will pop up the main menu of the program you are currently using.  This
> is very useful in that you do not need to physically move the mouse to the

1. How many people who use the NeXT know about this? I knew about it. I
think it's mostly useless. I can flick my wrist and get to the menu, or
better yet, use the keyboard equivalents (GASP! The HEATHEN!). 

> menu, you can just hit the second button and then have the menu pop up
> anywhere on the screen.  NeXT's use of VERTICAL menu's instead of HORIZONTAL
> menus makes this cool feature possible.  

2. Vertical versus Horizontal doesn't mean diddly. There are extensions
for the mac that *do*the*same*damn*thing*. It's up to the programmer how
the menu is to be ordered. Unless you mean to say that the NeXT is
incapable
of doing a horizontal menu???

> NeXT's menu system is very efficient
> and compact, the way it should be.

3. Is this a statement of fact, or a statement of superiority of the NeXT
over competing window systems? As a statement of fact, I can't argue with
it. As a statement of superiority, you'll have to provide some evidence.

> Secondly, if an application requires a third mouse button (like X-windows
> applications), then holding down both NeXT mouse buttons at the same
> duplicates a third button.  This is not possible on the new one button
> Mac mouses (which are utterly useless).

4. Is that part of the NeXT interface guidelines? or is this programmer
dependent???

Don't get me wrong, the NeXT is a fine machine. But as an *end user* and
not a *programmer*, I don't see it being vastly superior.

James
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: John Andrusiak <umandru1@umanitoba.ca>
Subject: Scully to IBM
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A78DD58A5D017214@umandppp.dial.umanitoba.ca>
X-Xxdate: Thu, 28 Jan 93 18:25:14 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 00:24:05 GMT

I just say an interesting article in the Globe and Mail. (A Canadian
newspaper, like the Wall Street Journal) The article discussed possible
replacements for Akers at IBM, now that IBM is looking for a new chief.

One of the people mentioned was the John Sculley of Apple. The reason
given was that he has experience in working with both the management side
of things (Which IBM has), and the technical/hackers side of things.
(which IBM needs.) It isn't that serious, because buying out Sculley
would take millions, as he has a lot invested in Apple stock options.

Another person given as a possible replacement was the head of Motorola.
Given the PowerPC project it's interesting, that there's a possibility
they might just swap heads of the companies.

How's this for a far-fetched scenario. Apple and Motorola get together
and buy out IBM. They spin off the mainframe division as a separate
company, transfer the semi-conductor research to Motorola, and
concentrate of PowerPC and other newer technologies.

The Ultimate revenge! Apple buys out IBM.

--------------------------------------
John Andrusiak - umandru1@umanitoba.ca
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ns111310@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Nathaniel Sammons)
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac (Again) was "Need to convin
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:16:02 GMT
Organization: Colorado State U. Engineering College


Well, there has been a lot of talk.... at least there has been no
real flames going back and forth (which surprises me)

Well, the comment was made about up grading the system software to 3.0
and automatically getting a PS level 2.0 printer thrown in. 

the answer is that the NeXT laser printer has no "brain" i.e. it has
no CPU for rasterizing the image.  This is why the NeXT has a dedicated
printer port, it has to transfer around a meg of info per page to the
printer, because it is already turned into a bitmap.  The rasterizing is 
done on the CPU, and it DOES slow down the machine when you print (although
not that much)...  This is also why the printer is so cheap.

someone made the comment of the OS being great.  it is.  There is a 
small issue of software though.  Ask a NeXT user (yours truly
included untill about 3:45pm today) about Word Porcessing on a NeXT,
believe me, it sucks hard.

THe NeXT is a kind of "Glorified Mac" really, it looks alot like one, but
it has a more stable OS, which is rock solid.

I used to have a NeXT, but I recently sold it in favor of sitting for a
while, and either buying a PowerBook or a PowerPC machine.  whichever is
cheaper and better, and out soon.

The thing that is annoying about the NeXT, though, is that if it had
200 or 300 MIPS hardware (hello, HP?) then it would absolutly scream.
A lot of CPU power is wasted on neeto looking windows that move when you
move them (you know what I mean) and lots of internals going on.

THe 3D facilities are great, RenderMan built into the system, and PostScript
level two (which would be great if it had an Adobe PixelBurst chip on the
motherboard).

Well, I'll get off my soapbox, but I think that Apple is doing the right thing
with PowerPC and PowerOpen 4.0


-nate sammons
 ns111310@longs.lance.colostate.edu
From: drm@esl.com (Don McGregor)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:58:57 GMT
Reply-To: drm@esl.com

In article <aggie-200193204326@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu>  
aggie@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu (I R A Aggie) writes:

[two button NeXT mice]
> No, the second is usually redundant. How many app's actually use
> the second one?? 

All of them.  The system is set up to pop up the application's menu under  
a right mouse click.  If two buttons is annoying, you can set the  
preferences (in the nifty graphical preferences application) to regard a  
mouse press on either button as a left mouse click.  I've got mine set up  
this way (my mac heritiage at work :-)

The consistent way applications use things like mouse button presses is a  
direct result of the NeXT's OOP approach.  I've never even thought about  
setting up mouse button clicking in any application I've written, yet they  
all work the way they're supposed to.

--
Don McGregor | "Remember, pocket protectors leave unsightly tan
drm@esl.com  |  lines."     --PV
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 23 Jan 93 14:39:59 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <y+l3dl#@rpi.edu>  writes:
>I'm pretty sure that RISC never refered to the number of instructions in  
the  
>instruction set.  It refered to the kinds of instructions in the  
instruction  
>set.  

Actually good RISC design did also demand a smaller number of instructions.   
The basic concepts were:

1)  Few instructions to make decode logic simpler
	(able to be hardwired rather than microprogrammed)
2)  Simple instructions to make smaller units for pipelining
3)  Large number of registers/register sets

There was other stuff, but that was the big 3, I think.

--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
From: david.n.wallace@f804.n800.z3.fido.zeta.org.au (David N wallace)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: VCR-PLUS
Date: 22 Jan 93 12:01:08 GMT
Organization: Fidonet. Gate admin is fido@socs.uts.edu.au


Thanks to all who have responded on the subject of VCR-Plus, illuminating me
to what this equipment does.

DNW 

--- TMail v1.31.3
 * Origin: Oracle PC-Network Australia's Busiest BBS (08) 234-0791
(3:800/804)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: edcrwfrd@unlv.edu (Edward Crawford)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: UNLV
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 23:42:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.203022.9646@qb.rhein-main.de> vhs@rhein-main.de writes:
>In article <z1h3lbb@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec315.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman  
>Johnson) writes:
>
>[a lot of NeXT bashing deleted]
>
>Interesting to note what your organisation line shows:
>
>>Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>
>I knew Sun was afraid of NeXT but I didn't know they would bash
>NeXT on usenet (especially without a disclaimer).

Oh please. Just because there is no disclaimer doesnt mean he is
that company. Disclaimers are a blight on this world. Its a
shame people cant use their head and realize just because someone
posts from someplace they are that place.



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: maynard@leah.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:56:20 GMT


>>I think it is you who needs to chekc your logic/reasoning.  Let's face 
>>it, have you ever worked on a NeXT?  I'm beginnin to think not by your 
>>stupid comments.  The next machne is sluggish compared to a Quadra in 
>>most cases.  It is true that in alot of OS cases etc. the NeXT behaves 
>>like an 030 IIci.  The MacOS interface is also a hell of a lot better 
>>than that cheap welfare interface Jobs ships with the NeXT computer!  The
>>>MacOS isn't pre-emptive multitasking, I'll admit that, but it's comming
>>>up!  But with all of thsoe things you said about Mac, it was still
>better 
>>than PCs, becuase the only "OK" current multitasker now on the PC 
>>platform is OS/2, forget about windows.  I don't see next capturing a 
>>large share of the marketplace anytime soon, and they don't deserve to.
>>
>
>I was going to follow up on your first post, but then I read this one.
>
>You are very inexperienced.
>
>Try developing software in a |good| UNIX environment.  Use other GUI's
>not just Sys7.  (Which is an adequate GUI.)  Try to escape Mac-centric
>thinking.  Since Jobs left, it's becoming "The computer for the rest
>of THEM".  Look at the computing world as a whole, not just the tiny
>niche apple has.

I've tried them. So what?
X windows resources suck. Limited power, horrible to edit (ResEdit is much
nicer), clustered all over the place in special files when they should be
part of a resource fork.
Widgets and gadgets suck. Use up way too much memory. SLOW!!!! Stupid
programming model that tries to emulate C++ in C.
How about getting sound out of X-Windows?
Ever tried writing X code that handles 24bit images? On my mac I can code
in one color model that works on all displays. On X I get a choice of 5
color models.
And what about this fun system of pallette lack of management.
OS/2 Windows fares no better in most respects.

Maybe you mean NeXT is better than Mac in these regards---can't say. But
your implied claim that most UNIX environments are better for programmin
than Mac is ludicrous. Maybe they're better for character based apps, but
not for graphical/sound apps.

Maynard Handley
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy