HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: isbell@cats.ucsc.edu (Art Isbell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Next NextWorld Expo
Date: 7 Nov 92 19:36:50 GMT
Organization: Cubic Solutions - NeXT software development and consulting
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Nov6.150558.29272@news.nd.edu> stukas@mbolo.cc.nd.edu (Jim Stukas) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.112156.4640@prim> dave@prim.demon.co.uk (Dave Griffiths)  
>writes:
>> In article <1d9knqINN6be@gap.caltech.edu> ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu  
>(Ernest Prabhakar) writes:
>> >
>> >True, San Fran is not easy for Europeans to get to.
>>  
>> But worth it, IMO. Leaving snow-bound Munich to lie on the beach in
>> California in January...
> ... rest of post deleted ...
>
>Not that it makes a difference to most folks planning to go, but don't bother  
>bringing your bathing suit to S.F. in January.

Or even in May when the Expo has apparently been scheduled in the exhibition
hall.  Northern California beaches in the springtime are typically fog-bound
and the water is at its coldest temperatures (of course, if you are a member of
the Polar Bear Club, the above does not apply :-)
-- 

Art Isbell                                                      Cubic Solutions
NeXT Registered Developer #745         NeXT software development and consulting
NeXTmail: isbell@cats.UCSC.EDU                             Voice: (408)335-1154
USmail: 95018-9442                                           Fax: (408)335-2515
From: carsten@pizza.fb10.tu-berlin.de (Carsten Schultz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT's binaries need a diet, or the solution to NeXT's multiprocessor problem.
Date: 11 Nov 1992 15:12:11 GMT
Organization: ZRZ/TU-Berlin
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carsten@pizza.fb10.tu-berlin.de (Carsten Schultz)
NNTP-Posting-Host: pizza.fb10.tu-berlin.de

In article <Nov.11.01.37.01.1992.26014@gandalf.rutgers.edu>  
szatrows@gandalf.rutgers.edu (John Kheit) writes:
.. When
> you double click on the app for the first time the machine figures out
> what CPU is being used and deletes all of the unecessary binaries in
> the wrapper.

Well this might be a nice option, but not useful for everyone. Please do  
not forget that there might be networks with different CPUed (what a word)  
computers. And I hope, this case will not be too unfrequent, as I still  
hope for a high end NeXT (a 486 will be a nice low end machine in a few  
years).

Carsten
(carsten@pizza.fb10.tu-berlin.de)

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: jfr@RedBrick.COM ()
Subject: Re: The Next NextWorld Expo
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:50:22 GMT

In article <gykwTB3w165w@tosh.UUCP> tosh!starta@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (John Starta) writes:
>dave@prim.demon.co.uk (Dave Griffiths) writes:
>
>> But does NeXTWorld actually pay for it? I would have thought they were too
>> small. NeXT themselves seemed to be in charge at the last one, and if the
>> next Expo is being delayed to fit in with NeXT's product announcements, it
>> implies a pretty cosy relationship.
 
  NeXTWorld is part of the IDG conglomerate that owns Computerworld,     
  Infoworld, PC World and almost all the other *world mags in the
  universe.  As such, I would hardly call it small.  It is expected
  to earn its own way, I suppose, but if it would be appropriate to
  fund an Expo, I am sure NeXTworld could find the resources.  I believe
  that the first NeXTworld Expo was completely funded by NeXTworld AND 
  NeXT itself.  NeXT provided the funds for the developers conference
  as well as much of the supporting staff and materials.  NeXTworld
  handled the exhibition and the users conference.  
>
>I think Mitch Hall Associates are the actual people behind the NeXTWorld 
>Expo. NeXTWorld magazine appears to "sponsor" the show in namesake only, 
>much like a corporation will sponsor a sports event or arena. As for 
>delaying the Expo for product announcements, it makes perfect sense: new 
>products mean better attendance, and that means more money.

  Mitch Hall may be behind the second Expo, I don't think they were
  involved in the first one, although I may certainly be proven wrong.

  Jon
From: ttn@cs.tut.fi (Tero Nieminen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT's binaries need a diet, or the solution to NeXT's multiproces
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:38:56
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland.
Distribution: world
	<92316.085803HWTQC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaarne.cs.tut.fi
In-reply-to: HWTQC@CUNYVM.BITNET's message of 11 Nov 92 13:58:03 GMT

In article <92316.085803HWTQC@CUNYVM.BITNET> HWTQC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:

   I don't quite understand this stuff, but if (say) the (unnecessary) 68040
   binaries are deleted from the server because I login and access the app
   from an as-yet-hypothetical-but-hoped-for NRW, then where does that leave
   someone who then wants to access the app from a 68040 workstation?

Umm.. What actually don't you understand? Naturally as far we want to be
running native code, we have to keep the binaries for each architecture
we plan to have support for. So it's up to the administration at the
server to decide what their clients need. It doensn't differ a bit from
the situation today. Still, it's good to have an opportunity to strip
any unnecessary binaries from a machine, say at your home, to save some
disk space..
-- 
         Tero Nieminen                      DANGER!
         ttn@cs.tut.fi                   Computer Bytes!
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: lytras@avalon.physik.unizh.ch (Apostolos Lytras)
Subject: Re: Byte Magazine pans the NeXTstation
Organization: Informatik Club d. Universitaet, Zuerich
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 10:37:53 GMT

In article <175@bytepb.UUCP> ben@bytepb.UUCP (Ben Smith @ BYTE) writes:
>pgriffin@uful07.phys.ufl.edu (Paul A. Griffin) writes:
>>You should take a look at this article.  It's the most bizzare product 
>>comparison that I've ever seen in Byte. 
>
>And face it, even though the newer model is faster than the older
>one, this is true for everyone else's workstation. Try putting
>the NeXTstation up against an R4000 Indigo or a DEC Alpha
>workstation.

*flame*
This is getting into ever more bizzarre comparisons. If you like the DEC
Alpha so much, then go on, just *TRY* putting one up against a
NeXTstation. The most obvious difference is, the NeXTstation is
available for quite a while now (I bought my first one 1.5 years ago)
and the DEC Alpha is still *NOWHERE*. It is said to run OSF/1, which
will probably be like the BSD DEC messed up (I am writing this on a
DECsystem running ULTRIX), and that OSF/1 from DEC has still not been
seen by many people. All the people that wrote to you, Ben, wanted you
to do reasonable comparisons. The comparison of a vapor-product from a
far (very far) future with a box that is almost from deep past just does
not work. (You may compare an R4000 Indigo with a NeXTstation Turbo
Color if you wish, but even then you should take into account that these
two machines are aimed at completely different markets. Therefore a
"scientific" (as you called it) comparison would be very difficult. The
second argument you just skipped was price, you just don't get a
computer with an R4000 and Display PostScript etc. at anything close to
NeXT's price.)
*endflame*

Cheers
- A.

-- 
	 lytras@ifi.unizh.ch   		|   Apostolos Lytras
	 lytras@avalon.physik.unizh.ch	|   Informatik Club der Uni
	 lytras@amiga.physik.unizh.ch  	|   Zuerich, SysAdmin
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: mneideng@thidwick.acs.calpoly.edu (Mark Neidengard)
Subject: Byte unfairness(?)
Organization: Academic Computing Services, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 18:04:47 GMT

Well, after having read the article in question, I was somewhat
disappointed, but not in the way the previous posters on this group were.  I
think that most people do not realize that computer mags, even Byte, are not
going to be the most objective institutions in the modern publishing milieu.
In comparison to the "PC" magazines, I find Byte to be the most informative,
and the LEAST biased.  For a mag that tries to cover everything from the
Amiga (augh) to the RS/6k's, I think they do a decent job.

I thought that the coverage of NeXTstep was not the most copious in the
world, but none of the systems received the pages that each of them could
have received, had column layout not been an issue.  I have used NeXT's,
Suns, HP's, the Quadra, and assorted 486's myself, and I can at least
understand some of the rationale behind the system picks.  On the face of
it, the Quadra does have the most "plug and play" characteristics, and there
is an abundance of thoroughly-developed software.  Since the Quadra and the
NeXT are roughly equal in processing power, I'm not surprised that the
NeXT's lack of OFF THE SHELF apps hurt it.  Remember, the NeXT was not
exactly conceived as the ultimate CAD workstation.  The RS/6k was, and that
is part of why it won (that and the powerful CPU).  I thought the HP was
slighted a little, since the rubrik required a DTP package that is not all
that important for the Unix community per se.  	I know that I would prefer
the 710 of all the systems reviewed, followed by the NeXT and then the
RS/6k.

No one here would say that the NeXT is a bad machine, and the OS is famous
for it's GUI and programming features.  The CRITICAL problem, and one that
NeXT had BETTER fix if it wants to survive is the issue of available power.
The NeXT machines simply AREN'T POWERFUL ENOUGH.  On a Sun or an HP, I
expect some speed, and near instant responses to commands.  The NeXT simply
isn't up there yet.  The Nitro will hopefull address this, as will NS-486
when it runs on the Pentium.  Until then, the NeXT is my first choice for a
second machine (provided I get some more $$$) =)

Mark Neidengard
mneideng@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu
NeXTmail to data.acs.calpoly.edu
"Is this a nightmare,
 Or the American Dream?"
	Ice T


Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George)
Subject: Re: NeXT's binaries need a diet, or the solution to NeXT's multiprocessor problem.
Organization: OSF RI Grenoble
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:29:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.092759.4351@cs.tu-berlin.de>, marcel@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (Marcel Weiher) writes:
|> jfr@RedBrick.COM () writes:
|> 
|> >In article <83161@ut-emx.uucp> ifbb657@cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:
|> >>[munch desrciption of intermediate binary code distribution with 
|> >> machine dependent compilation at each user's site]
|> >
|> >>NeXT will have something no other computer has dreamed of offering :-)
|> >
|> >  Its a great idea.  Just not very original (sorry to puncture your
|> >  balloon).  In fact, this issue has been under consideration by
|> >  OSF for some time now and a standard has been proposed.  Its called
|> [...details deleted...]
|> 
|> It's even less original than that.  Check out the March 91 Byte
|> International Section p. 117:  "Taos: An Innovatiion in Operating
|> Systems". 

Maybe so, there is nothing new under the sun after all.  The ANDF technology
was developed by Britain's defence establishment some time ago.

Basically life isn't as simple as going down to pcode and then doing some final
compile.  Things such as processing include files have to wait 'till you get to
the target machine as many things therein are machine dependent.  You end up
with a mixture of high level language and intermediate code.  With the
complication of support for various languages ANDF is a fairly large undertaking
compared to fat binaries.

David.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: garylang@netcom.com (Gary Lang)
Subject: Re: NeXT's binaries need a diet, or the solution to NeXT's multiprocessor problem.
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 19:38:38 GMT

"binaries must be compiled and included with the release.  P-Code is
too S----L----O----W, and interpreting binaries is slllloooowwww
also."  


You should run Microsoft Excel sometime. It is faster than any
competitive spreadsheet for Windows or the Macintosh, yet it is the
only one compiled to P-Code. If NeXT did as good a job as Microsoft, I
don't see this as a problem.

-g

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson)
Subject: Re: NeXT edu prices go UP! AGAIN!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 02:54:02 GMT

spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:

>For comparison, a Sun ELC 8/207 17" mono is $3,106.  Add a few  
>hundred dollars for more RAM, and you have a system just as capable  
>as a Turbo Slab for $1,500 less.  How many students do you think will  
>be willing to pay $1,500 for the privilege of running NeXTSTEP?

It depends what they plan to do.  If it is involving Mathematica,
and being productive, I think that many students will choose NeXT
for the reasons of: bundled Mathematica, useful interface. 
(I dare someone who has used OpenLook with a Sun ELC to tell me that
it is 'just as capable as a NeXTStation Turbo'.... esp. with 8 MB
RAM!!!)

>Also for comparison, a Quadra 950 8/230 with 16" color monitor is  
>$6,580, compared to $6,371 for a NSC Turbo 16/250 with 17" monitor.   
>A <$200 price advantage isn't going to overcome the much greater  
>software range available on Macs.
Once again, it depends on what they intend to use it for.
Mathematica being bundled might be important.  Maybe they only need
a few DTP apps and find that they can get their work done more
quickly with NeXT's completely standardized Operating Environment.
(well, it's completely standardized in comparison to most other
OS's!)  Also, the 10-12 week lead time on Mac Quadras has
discouraged more than a few buyers... NeXTStation Turbos are often
shipped within 4-6 weeks.

Also, I have not checked out most recent price lists, but it might
be that Stanford's computer center/bookstore has decided to raise
its prices?  Or perhaps its contract has been changed so as to
change their discount level? (ie maybe the list prices haven't
really changed, but once again, I haven't checked)
-- 
David Lemson                                                (217) 244-1205
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu                UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson 
NeXTMail accepted                                  BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Robert Stephen Rodgers)
Subject: Re: NeXT edu prices go UP!
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 00:37:48 GMT

In article <ijeff.721171909@cunews> ijeff@alfred.carleton.ca (Ian Jefferson) writes:
>Actually I recall that in QTY 1000 that the 68040-33 cost around $800 in
>Feb 92.  It must have come down some since then but even so...


	If so, NeXT would be wise to get away from Motorola as fast as they
	can.  That's entirely too much--more, by almost 1/3rd, 
	than the price of 80486DX2-66's.. ($530 or so in similiar
	quantities, last I read.. )



>I would guess that the station costs NeXT more like $2k so selling it for 
>$4K seems reasonable.  


	Not a chance.  Maybe if we're discussing a system with 16megs
	and 600megs of HD..


>Besides NeXT is only just now becomeing profitable.


	Are they?  Please excuse my ignorance (serious) -- but
	last I heard they were still _losing_ money and taking out
	more loans (and they already have a huge amound outstanding)..

	Note that this was from a computer rag, so it's probably not 
	really reliable..



>I think the high cost of NeXT is a myth. Try to purchase a '486 with enough
>i/o memory network and graphics and you will be spending as much as on a NeXT.
>And there are millions of 486's not just thousands!



	Not on this Earth, at least.

	GATEWAY 486DX2-66 system
	16 megs 32 bit 60ns RAM
	540 meg HD  (local bus IDE)
	ATI Graphics Ultra Plus (local bus)
	
	~$3500 

	Ethernet adapter $300 (a _good_ adapter)
	19" color monitor $1000 (rough estimate).. 

	That's about $4800 or so for a system that will easily and
	far outperform any slab you can buy for the same price.  In fact,
	even throwing in:

	Sound board (_good one_) $250
	CD Rom drive $400 (good one)
	Tape backup ($250) 

	That's still only $5700--a little less than a low-end 
	color slab (if edu prices at UofMD haven't changed recently).

	And I was _way_ overestimating the prices here, too.

-- 
 /============================rsrodger@wam.umd.emu====================\
| Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd!  What do I see on thee?           |
| Bottom: What do you see?  You see an ass-head of your own, do you?   |
 \NeXTMail accepted here......I'd sell my soul for Offline mail!!!..../!
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough)
Subject: Re: NeXT hardware strategy
Organization: University of Toronto, Dept. of Statistics
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:54:22 GMT

In article <2234@ltb.ltb.bso.nl> gerben@rna.indiv.nluug.nl writes:
>This is the situation NeXT is in (in my opinion):
>
>	If NS486 is too cheap they won't sell any NeXT hardware anymore. They
>will probably be having problems selling NeXT hardware as it is, because
>companies normally go for secure buys, especially in recession. An 486 box is
>a more secure hardware investment than a NeXT box.

If NeXt can't price their hardwrae appropriately then perhaps they should not
be in the hardware business.
>
>	If NS486 is sold well, it will biuld an installed base that will give
>the company more credibility. At that point they can more succesfully compete
>with their own hardware.

I really don't understand this. What matters is the OS, applications,...and
not the processor it's running on (assuming it works!). Selling NS 486 for
a high price just ensures that it and NeXt will remain niche items.
>
>	Pricing of NeXTSTEP 486 will drop as soon as NeXT has a machine that
>is capable to outperform normal PC hardware more than it does already. (You
>know, MIPS, SPECmarks and 'processor speeds' don't tell you very much. Try
>running a PostScript animation on a NS486 486 50MHz DX box and you'll notice).

A 50MHz DX with the appropriate bus and graphics' subsystems works just fine.
Perhaps you should try running NS3.0 on a colour station.
>
>	I think it is almost the only sound strategy they could have come up
>with. It now all depends on the speed and quality that NeXT can come up with
>when executing this strategy.
>
>[sidestep on]
>
>Btw. I expect that the Pentium (when it arrives) will be register-starved and
>have bugs. Since Moto processors are more elegant (generally speaking), I hope
>they get their act together soon.

What nonsense. Perhaps you'd care to explain Motorola's problems with floating
point operations. The basic fact seems to be that Intel has won the micro
processor chip war. NeXT was wise to go with a 586. They should switch over
as quickly as possible. This can only help the installed base.
>
>Did you ever wonder why Intel got together with NeXT? Simple: Microsoft tried
>to be less depending on them (Ace, Alpha...).

Oh come on...   
>
>Do I like industry watching!

I wouldn't go into the business of producing a newsletter based on your 
observations if I were you.
 
Philip McDunnough
philip@utstat.toronto.edu
From: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Subject: Re: DEC's alpha is "way fast" according to WSJournal
Reply-To: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 18:35:02 GMT

Richard Myers writes

>>> > Digital's Alpha chip is a technical departure from much of the rest
>>> > of the field, capable of swallowing 64 bits of data at once, or
>>> > four billion times as much data as the 32-bit chips championed by
>>         ^^^^^^^
>>I suspect you missed the nine extra orders of magnitude. A glaring
>>error on the journalist's part.

> /users/kurt>bc
> 2^32
> 4294967296

> 4,294,967,296 ... Looks like 4 billion to me.

Indeed, I read "addressing space" into the comment rather than "I/O
bandwidth" since reading the latter seemed kind of ridiculous.
The addressing capability is important.  Imagine a database being
distributed on several laserdisc platters.  You can memory map the
whole thing, if you wanted.

One of the Alpha server configurations does have quite a large
memory capacity (512 Meg, I think? 1 Gig with higher deinsity chips?
I forgot exactly.) So not pushing 32 bits of addressing for real
memory yet...

Oh, as an interesting side note, if you ever get a chance to look
inside one of the machines, do so.  It's worth a giggle or two to
see those cooling fins on the chip bigger than a '57 Chevy's.
Kinda sounds like one, too, when the three fans rev up on power
on...

--
Scott Byer                             NeXTMail: byer@mv.us.adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated               These are *my* opinions, and  
1585 Charleston Road, P.O. Box 7900        do not necessarily reflect
Mountain View, CA 94039-7900             the opinions of my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: dubi@shadow.cs.columbia.edu (Yury Dubinsky)
Subject: Re: NeXT edu prices go UP!  AGAIN!
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:21:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.083834.4422@leland.Stanford.EDU>  
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:
> The implication is indeed obvious, and most welcome.  But will  
> anything happen in time?  NeXT does not have a huge window of  
> opportunity before NT, Pink, Taligent, etc come on line.
> 
> The problem for NeXT is not simple, incidentally.  On the one hand  
> they have a whole bunch of users whining about how slow 3.0 is, on  
> the other hand they have another group clamoring for low-cost  
> workstations.  Hard to satisfy both groups at once, especially for a  
> company of NeXT's resources.
> etc....

The arguments here are great, especially about NeXT user groups helping  
people, not necessarily just students, install RAM, HDs, etc...

What do the people at NeXT have to say?  I hope I am not wrong to assume  
that at least SOMEONE at NeXT is actually reading posts about their  
products.  At the end-user level we can talk all we want about prices, how  
to get the best deal, etc., but I'd like to know what NeXT has to say  
about some of the recent postings about their (educational) prices.
From: rmyers@dec5200.acs.uci.edu (Richard Myers)
Subject: Re: DEC's alpha is "way fast" according to WSJournal
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 12 Nov 92 04:56:11 GMT

In article <BxL40H.8G8@beach.csulb.edu> werts@piggy.cecs.csulb.edu (Michael Werts) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.174833.20588@adobe.com> byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)  
>writes:
>> Joseph R. Grace <JGrace@TetraSoft.com> writes
>> 
>> > The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, November 10, 1992, page B4, John
>> > R.  Wilke, staff reporter of The Wall Street Journal.
>> 
>> > Digital's Alpha chip is a technical departure from much of the rest
>> > of the field, capable of swallowing 64 bits of data at once, or
>> > four billion times as much data as the 32-bit chips championed by
>         ^^^^^^^
>I suspect you missed the nine extra orders of magnitude. A glaring
>error on the journalist's part.

/users/kurt>bc
2^32
4294967296

4,294,967,296 ... Looks like 4 billion to me.
Seriously, just because you can grab a chunk of data that represents a
number 4 billion times that of a 32 bit chunk of data, does that mean
you're doing 4 billion times the IO?  Could it mean that under any
circumstances?  What if you're very tricky? 
It was all so clear before I started to think...
Kurt