HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kls30@cd.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Date: 21 Jan 93 19:22:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <ibhan.727634981@husc.harvard.edu>, ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu
(Ishir Bhan) writes:
>In <1993Jan21.020519.5649@nimno.wpa.com> john@wpa.com (John Bartley)
>writes:
>
>>$709 for A/UX??? If that is what it costs, then why does NeXT get so 
>>>much grief for _daring_ to suggest that NS486 _might_ (it remains to
>be  
>>seen) list for $995? I never read any posts here complaining that A/UX
>>>costs too much, but lots of folks here have been very vocal about how
>>>outrageous NS486 pricing is, and how ignorant NeXT is for charging so
>>>much. Last time I checked, it didn't seem to me that A/UX was 70% of 
>>>NeXTSTEP. If it IS, then why aren't all high-end Mac users running
>it?
>
>First of all, you need a CD-ROM drive.  Also, if I'm not mistaken, you

You need a CD-ROM for AU/X also.  I don't remember it being offered on tape.
If it is you still need a tape drive so that whole argument is moot.  If you
claim it can be installed from floppies, you have never tried to do a UNIX
install.  Floppies just don't cut it unless you have absolutely, 
positively, no other alternative in the world.

>need to spend $2,500 for the dev. edition of NeXTStep '486.  I'm not sure
>what Apple's CD comes with, but I think it has some development tools. 

The basic development stuff for "C" is GNU so it's free on the NeXT.  I don't
recall Apple ever giving away developer tools.   

>It's also only $650 from the Apple Catalog, so I expect you can get it for
>less from elsewhere.

It depends on what type of pricing Apple gives on AU/X.  NS-486 has a list
of $995 so I'm sure it will be cheaper.

>-- 
>******************************************************************************
>Ishir Bhan               * "Every day they take one more set away...."
>ibhan@husc.harvard.edu   *                   -The Cure, "Forever"
>******************************************************************************

-- 
/*  What me, speak for Amdahl?  Get real.  These opinions and statements  */
/*  belong to me and me only.   If something I said offends you, it's     */
/*  either you got a thin skin or that I'm just offensive.  Who cares.    */
/*                                                                        */
/* "I'm not going to sit at your table and watch you eat, with nothing    */
/*  on my plate, and call myself a diner. Sitting at the table doesn't    */   
/*  make you a diner.  Being here in America doesn't make you an          */
/*  American."                                                            */
/*							--Malcolm X       */
/*                                                                        */
/* kls30@cd.amdahl.com  -  Don't send NeXTmail!!                          */
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:35:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.153449.19374@nmsu.edu> bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) writes:
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>>Argh!  A Quadra server system configured properly will cost near $10,000.
>>You can get a NeXT, with all bundled software necessary for networking,
>>file serving, and the like for under $6000 (list).  NeXTSTEP 486 will also
>>run on the new Pentium chips (586), so if you really really need speed,
>>buy a Pentium chip and get NeXTSTEP to run on it.  If you need things now,
>>Settle for a 66Mhz 486/DX2 running NeXTSTEP 486.  This configuration is 
>>even faster than the current NeXT systems (unless of course you take advantage
>>of NeXT's multi-processing capabilities and add on extra CPU's).


>Define 'configured properly' especially when a Quadra 950 8MB/230MB
>street costs ~$7000.  What is the remaining $3000 going to?

The LIST price for a NeXTSTATION Turbo with 8megs of memory and 250 MB hard
drive is only $5995 (street is much cheaper) AND if you are a developer
you own the rights to the full suite of NeXT development tools, so what
is your point?

For a Quadra to even begin competing with a NeXT computer you need to add
A/UX ($700), C, C++, and Objective C compilers ($1000), Digital Signal 
Processing Board for CD Quality 44 kHz sound ($500-1000), Development Tools
like Serius Developer (which by the way pales in comparison to NeXT's 
Interface Builder) $600, Multimedia Mail application ($200?), On line
Webster's Complete Ninth Collegiate Dicionary and Thesauraus (not available
for Mac), Postscript Level II built in, Pixars Photo Realisitc and Interactive
Renderman (bundled with NeXTSTEP) $2000.  Can I stop yet?


>The Pentium is on hold for the moment and the PowerPC chip and a version 
>of PowerOpen {A/UX 4.0} are out to the developers.  IBM is planning to reliece
>its 601 machine using A/UX 4.0 as an OS in first to second quarter 1993
>{9 to 6 months a head of Apple's 601.}  
>My advice. WAIT until later in the year and then deside.  Right now the
>industry is a mess with rumors of Pentium heat problems and the P5 dieing
>in favor of the P6 and a IBM PowerPC machine coming out in early 1993.

Whatever happens, NeXTSTEP will run on the  486, 586, and Motorola 680x0 line.

Eric
From: ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 24 Jan 93 20:43:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc.ibhan.727908214

In <g#m35-n@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib106.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>I'll have to remember that. I've been going around thinking only
>the Mac could do that.

Yeah, but do you know how much a NeXT Dimension board costs?  Also, the
NeXtSTations don't have slots for one.
-- 
******************************************************************************
Ishir Bhan               * "Every day they take one more set away...."
ibhan@husc.harvard.edu   *                   -The Cure, "Forever"
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccsouth07.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:56:13 GMT

In article 2AH@cuug.ab.ca, wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
>In article <l7f3y=h@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>>>Yes, but it is simply a TIFF image.  It's hard to believe that he was
>>>able to damage the OS by changing it.  He must have deleted a bunch of
>>>files.
>>
>>That seems a bit uncharitable. Is it easy to accidentally delete files
>>on the NeXT? (I would not have thot so)
>
>It's very difficult to delete system files unless you login as root. As
>root, you can destroy everything fairly easily. Therefore, only qualified
>people should have root access. This is not to say that you shouldn't use
>the root account when you need to, just that you shouldn't touch it if you
>don't know what you're doing.

Without bothering to restate my usual "I dont care whose fault it is" argument,
I'll just say that that's not quite what I meant.

Is it, in general, easy to accidentally delete a file? Like, say,
your 2354 page report?

Doesn't look it, but with all this talk I thot I might make sure.

>>He was able to accidentally muck up his machine to the point that
>>nobody- not even NeXT- could figure out how to unmuck it- just
>>by sheer ignorance?
>
>It takes a fair amount of work to kill UNIX. Of course, if he had read the
>manual, he could have booted through the ROM monitor and bypassed the 
>tiff login panel. Then he could have repaired his error. He didn't need
>to reinstall. All I can say is 'would you let a 2 year old play with ResEdit?'

I wouldn't ship ResEdit with the system. To do so lets the 2 year olds
fool with them.

>I doubt it.

Apparently NeXT doens't feel the same way, that's all.

> If they hadn't been logged in as root, they couldn't have
>done all the damage they did. If they don't know what they're doing, they
>should stay away from the root account.

They ->DIDN'T<- know what they were doing.

Hence the problem.
---
			- 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@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 02:05:35 GMT

In article 21285@athena.mit.edu, zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>In article <r=k3mn@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib102.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>>In article 1526@cubetech.com, andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan20.234117.17575@nmsu.edu> bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) writes:
>>
>>>  Indeed, NeXTSTEP is much more
>>>advanced than Macintosh in just about every single aspect.
>>
>>>  That's why
>>>Apple is trying to copy NeXT with their Pink/Taligent stuff.
>>
>>
>>NeXT still uses an application centered design, like the Mac. Taligent
>>will be document centered.
>>
>>Now that is a big difference- for users.
>>---
>>			- Dan Johnson
>
>Archetype Inc. is releasing the Archetype Document Engine for NeXT computers
>next month.  This is a document centered engine where several tools work
>togehter to complete a single document (i.e. you have a spelling tool to
>check the spelling, text tool to write the text, graphics tool to set the
>graphis, page layout tool to set up the docuement form, etc).  Document
>based computing is here TODAY, 2 years before Taligent even ships.  And it
>is only available on NeXTSTEP.
>

And OS/2. (ok, ok, the WPS isn't the same product. But it does what I was
talking about.)

But this is neat stuff. How does it manage this neat trick?

---
			- 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: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 18:21:06 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.235432.11874@nmsu.edu> bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) writes:
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>
>Questions:  Does the NeXT have SCSI-2 built in as does the Quadra 950, are 
>there Rockets other that allow dual CPU processing for the NeXT, EtherNet
>Phase-2 support built in?  If so then the NeXT does beat the pants off
>the Mac, if not then I say they are about even.

NeXT operating kernel (Mach) is a MULTI-PROCESSING kernel.  Therefore, the
operating system itself supports multi-processing.  The RISC NeXTStations
in development should allow processors to be added one by one, much in the
same way memory is added to a machine.  Right now, a company called
spherical solutions sells multi-processing boards for the NeXT, which are
very inexpensive.

NeXT has been using SCSI-II since 1989.  

I don;t know about Ethernet "Phase-2" (don't even know what Phase-2 is!),
but all NeXT sysstems have built in 10MB/sec ethernet.

Eric


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 01:13:51 GMT

>duplicates a third button.  This is not possible on the new one button
>Mac mouses (which are utterly useless).

MacX and Exodus (both X-Windows client environments for the Mac) allow
the a different key to be held down to get two of the buttons.  This is
a VERY simple solution to what you make out to be an enormous problem.

Besides, I have yet to find any problem with a 1 button mouse.  I won't
bore you with all the problems I have with a 3 button mouse (I think I've
already done that before).


Jess Holle
From: ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Date: 25 Jan 93 04:55:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc.ibhan.727937730
 <C18w8M.HK6@cuug.ab.ca> <1993Jan24.194454.24541@fcom.cc.utah.edu>

In <1993Jan24.194454.24541@fcom.cc.utah.edu> yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu (Yan Fang/Humanities) writes:

>>I think I'm missing the point here. NeXT has no new hardware because there's
>>no new 680X0 chip. They're working on new hardware, but it won't be based on
>>the 68000 line. That takes time. Apple can have new hardware every month 
>>because it's just rehashing all of its old computers.

NeXT could use some rehashed machines.  The only greyscale machines you
can get are 4-level, and there's no slots for anything other than the
Cube.  There's also no way to upgrade to color without selling your old
machine.

>>Does Windows run reliably and at an acceptable speed under any circumstances?

>More to the point, NeXTSTEP '486 isn't emulating Windows. Windows and DOS
>actually run on the '486. Why write an emulator for a '486 when the real
>hardware resides on your motherboard?

Who does this?  I don't know of any product which emulates its own processor.

-- 
******************************************************************************
Ishir Bhan               * "Every day they take one more set away...."
ibhan@husc.harvard.edu   *                   -The Cure, "Forever"
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: rawyatt@phakt.usc.edu (Robert Alexander Wyatt)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 24 Jan 1993 00:16:08 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: phakt.usc.edu


The Quadra/NeXT comparison thread is interesting, but let's face it...a
Quadra can't measure up...Speed might be the same...but the OS...that's
what's important...a Mac Classic is better then a DX2/66 running only
MS-DOS, but that's my opinion (I know...short sighted comparison...the
apps are what is important)...As for multiple processors on NeXT, I belive
there is a board...remember hearing something about it...It isn't like the
Rocket...I think there is one for DSPs...something else...hope a NeXThead
with a little more knowledge will know what I'm talking about and take
time to post, but basically one of these boards increases processing power
by 5x...so with a true multitasking/multithread system, the actual number
of processors isn't really that relevant...

The price/performace comparison between a Quadra and NeXT is silly though...
Until Apple sticks a decent OS in the Quadra, it might as well be a Classic...

-Rob
rawyatt@scf.usc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 00:54:49 GMT

If the network was not going to start out large and heterogeneous, it 
would SEEM TO ME that the wise move would be to use a small Appletalk
LAN for the time being.  If you are really big into speed, add ethernet
and use ethertalk.  When the network grows beyound this or you want to
add PC's, etc, then Novell becomes more advantageous.

Just my silly opinion,
Jess Holle
From: wrob@unixg.ubc.ca (Robert Wong)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 23 Jan 1993 00:29:28 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <1jpothINN8ak@shelley.u.washington.edu> jaesyn@carson.u.washington.edu (Jason Smith) writes:
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>
>>In article <1jl75mINN4a8@shelley.u.washington.edu> jaesyn@carson.u.washington.edu (Jason Smith) writes:
>I'm afraid.  Otherwise, yes, I might agree with you.  But, for the hypothetical
>idiots, the Mac is easier.
>

Please, play nice.  Remember what mom said:  "If you can't say anything nice..."
 RWW.

-- 
Robert W. "What!?! I've-been-tying-my-shoelaces-backwards-all-my-life?" Wong Jr.
wrob@unixg.ubc.ca (ASCII only)
From: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kelvin Leung)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Date: 28 Jan 93 01:38:39 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Holcomb) writes:

>This EMPLANT is quite impressive.  How much does it cost?  Is it still
>available?  Where from?  There are many Amiga users here in the Virginia
>Tech Computer Science Department who may be interested in EMPLANT, if
>it is not too incredibly expensive.

about $300.  It is still kind of flaky though... ask Jim Drew about it.
He always hang out at comp.sys.amiga.emulations.

>Dave Holcomb
>holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu

Yours Sincerely,
Kelvin
e-mail: abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Holcomb)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:44:49 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

This EMPLANT is quite impressive.  How much does it cost?  Is it still
available?  Where from?  There are many Amiga users here in the Virginia
Tech Computer Science Department who may be interested in EMPLANT, if
it is not too incredibly expensive.

Dave Holcomb
holcomb@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: garylang@netcom.com (Gary Lang)
Subject: Re: NeXTstep vs. Taligent
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 21:40:55 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.192322.8465@leland.Stanford.EDU> kocks@leland.Stanford.EDU (Peter Kocks) writes:
>***Mach***) provides messaging.  You cannot make a good OOUE without good
>messaging.  Another critical feature is Obj-C.  Taligent is trying to
>make an OOUE in C++.  While C++ is the industry standard it requires strong
>type casting.  This means that every object must know about every concievable
>message (or method in C++) it will call before runtime.  This makes 
>making an OOUE essentially impossible.  So, they must be hacking a weak
>type casting system into C++.  This is certainly possible, but a royal
>pain.  I've heard Taligent engineers complain about this.  Finally, no
>matter how you want people to use the new operating system you must
>provide for the option of using an application/file based model.  People will
>want to do what they did before.  In short, Taligent will have to have
>to provide Mac compatiblilty.  I believe this is already planned.  
>
>Much of the above may already be coded.   But, as far as I have heard none
>of it is released.  The messaging OS is not released.  The C++ weak casting
>messaging system is not released.  The Mac compitibity is not released.

My understanding of what they are doing is that they have a C++ 
that is really just syntactic sugar around an objective-C like system.
That is, rather than rely on vtbls they translate to some form 
of runtime messge lookup system...somewhat like what I 
understand Component Software does. So, it's basically Objective-C
using foo->msg() rather than [ foo msg ] with all of the other
er, benefits of C++_ available.

This is a smart commercial move.

-g
From: 177wardell@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 24 Jan 93 17:01:37 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <1993Jan24.212707.27205@fcom.cc.utah.edu>, yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu (Yan Fang/Humanities) writes:
> Apparently, NeXTSTEP '486 runs DOS/Windows on the '486 itself; it doesn't
> emulate it as does OS/2 2.0. That's a big win; you never have to worry
> about your Windows emulation because you're not emulating it. When
> someone hands you a Windows app on a floppy, just run it under Windows.


	What?  Have you ever even used OS/2?  OS/2 has the ACTUAL
Windows code in it.  It is pretty unlikely that NeXT486 is going to
be able to come close to touching OS/2's speed at running WIndows or
DOS since OS/2 runs DOS in most cases FASTER than DOS.   When I run
video games, I generally do it under OS/2 instead of just plain DOS since
I get that extra 10% speed increase.  I don't know why you guys are even
discussing this vaporware OS.  Sure, it's in beta but trying to tell your
boss to jump into a brand new ported OS that isn't even released is not
very wise.  First, you don't know when it is giong to be released exactly
and secondly, you don't know how well it is going to run.  LIsten to all
the windows NT users, they would have you tihnk that NT is going to be
the greatest thing in the world but NT doesn't run DOS apps very well and
even Windows 3.1 programs run noticably slower on it than on say OS/2 2.1
beta.

> 
> Surprisingly, there are more than a few productivity NeXTSTEP
> productivity apps. If your users aren't running AutoCAD or a 3D modelling
> package, they'll have a choice between what apps to use, be they
> spreadsheets, word processors, or page layout tools. 
> 
> If you are faced with the onerous task of writing checks (or recommending
> writing checks) and you must justify your decision later to some
> higher-up, you should at least evaluate NeXTSTEP '486 as a potential solution.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Yan Fang-Magnusson
> Ph.D. candidate, philosophy, University of Utah
> yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu
> yanfang@cc.utah.edu (NeXTmail)

						-brad
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:23:52 GMT

In article <r=k3mn@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib102.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>In article 1526@cubetech.com, andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan20.234117.17575@nmsu.edu> bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) writes:
>
>>  Indeed, NeXTSTEP is much more
>>advanced than Macintosh in just about every single aspect.
>
>>  That's why
>>Apple is trying to copy NeXT with their Pink/Taligent stuff.
>
>
>NeXT still uses an application centered design, like the Mac. Taligent
>will be document centered.
>
>Now that is a big difference- for users.
>---
>			- Dan Johnson

Archetype Inc. is releasing the Archetype Document Engine for NeXT computers
next month.  This is a document centered engine where several tools work
togehter to complete a single document (i.e. you have a spelling tool to
check the spelling, text tool to write the text, graphics tool to set the
graphis, page layout tool to set up the docuement form, etc).  Document
based computing is here TODAY, 2 years before Taligent even ships.  And it
is only available on NeXTSTEP.

Eric
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy