HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 15:32:54 CST

In article <1992Dec11.193330.20088@squid9.cuc.ab.ca>
terry@squid9.cuc.ab.ca (Terry Wilcox) writes:
 
>
>In article <1992Dec9.193348.15728@athena.mit.edu>
>zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>>
>> Pink won't be out until AT LEAST 1994.  In fact, in a press clip I
>read,
>> a Taligent representative was asked why so long before Pink will be
>> released.  His answer:
>>
>> "Building an object-oriented computing environment is harder than
>we thought".
>>
>> Goes to show how good of a job NeXT has done.  By 1994, NeXT will
>have
>> technology far beyond what Pink will have when released, seeing as
>they
>> have a four year head start.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>
>I don't think NeXT's lead will be the full four years. Pink will
>likely have the capabilities of a NeXTSTEP 2.0/3.0 cross. I would
>guess that it will have all of 2.0's neat things and most of 3.0's
>new neat things. Of course, NeXT will at least be on NeXTSTEP 4.0 and
>hopefully on its way to 5.0.
>
>NeXT's real advantage will be with its multiple platforms. Pink is
>supposed to be multi-platform too, but Taligent will be too busy
>getting it to work properly on one platform. I doubt they'll get
>around to porting it right away.
>
>While Taligent is laboring to get Pink 1.0 ready, NeXT has the luxury
>of adding interesting things to NeXTSTEP 4.0 and 5.0.
>
Hmm. I guess the combined resources of Apple and IBM won't be any
help to Taligent? Yeah, NeXT could easily stay ahead of two giants,
especially now that they'll be supporting two platforms. Don't
expect NS 3.0 for awhile now that they'll be worrying over NS486.
 
>Terry Wilcox
>
>--
>Terry Wilcox            | 'Next to the originator of a good sentence
>terry@squid9.cuc.ab.ca  | is the first quoter of it.'
>NeXTmail welcome        |  - RALPH WALDO EMERSON
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark Eaton                    | Opinions? We're not allowed to have
UC525655@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU | opinions at Mizzou... get back to me
                              | in '94 when I graduate... ;)
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 12 Dec 92 20:28:13 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In article <wf_D=9200iV483mhw2@andrew.cmu.edu> cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Carl B Jabido) writes:
>Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.advocacy: 11-Dec-92 Re: Mac
>multitasking? by Mark Munson@animal.es.co 
>> You've got a monochome display computer that is running a B&W paint program.
>> Suddenly to decide to get color capabilities and a color monitor.  How do
>> you get your current B&W paint program to support color?  Do you have to
>> upgrade your software to take full advantage of the upgrade?
>
>No.  If it was written with objects, then possibly there's an object
>that controls color selection.  Assuming that, then you can get a new
>color selection object, for example, one that controls 24-bit color
>instead of 2-bit.
>
>Carl


Absolutely correct, Carl.  I should have said that in the beginning to avoid
all of this discussion.  You see, you can think of objects as little black
boxes.  You put an input into those objects, and you get an output spit
back out to you.  NeXTStep programs (object oriented technology) consist
of an interconnected set of objects, all sending messages to one another. If
the object that handles color capability is upgraded from 2-bit to 24-bit,
all programs that are written for the system will benefit from the upgrade,
since they all use the NeXT color panel.

All of these concepts are truly amazing when seen in person, but to read
about them just does not do them justice.  I suggest that anyone who has
time, have someone who knows about NeXT at your university show you
a quick demo.  Only then will you truly see the advantage.  About a year
ago, someone told me to call 1-800-848-NeXT and have them send me information
about the system.  It was the smartest thing I ever did, and it was free.

Eric
Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.advocacy:3264 comp.sys.mac.hardware:23948 comp.sys.mac.system:15133
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Distribution: world
From: asjk@ultramac.uucp (John Knefel)
Organization: Odyssey Ultraware, Inc
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:28:43 CDT
Subject: Re: MAC percentage of the Market

Talking about Mac vs IBM market shares for PC sales.

I have no problems with anyone's assertion or figures which indicate that
Apple WAS first in sales last quarter or the first half of the year (we assume
these are fiscal figures instead of the calendar designations), whatever. At
present, owing to IBMs new low price line and other stratgies these things
change rapidly. As others have noted, share percentages are close so that
means, like a horse race, different shapshots will show different "horses" in
the lead. I stand by the Journal article of TWO WEEKS AGO. I would love to see
Apple regain the lead since I am a stockholder. I'll keep a look out for more
up-to-date figures and let you all know. 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: cmurphy@cae.wisc.edu (Christopher Murphy)
Subject: Re: MAC Harddrive space
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin--Madison
Distribution: na
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:32:54 CST

In article <TOMSTER.92Dec15184036@bigwpi.WPI.EDU> tomster@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Thomas Richard Dibble) writes:
>>>>>> On 15 Dec 92 14:05:11 EDT, bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) said:
>
>  BC> In article <1992Dec6.224612.11434@doug.cae.wisc.edu>,
>  BC> cmurphy@cae.wisc.edu (Christopher Murphy) writes:
>> I have a question that hopefully somebody can answer.
>

Wow... what response. It's a good thing I didn't try to formulate a decision
based on all the consistent (NOT) views about hard drives.

I'm happy to say I got a great deal on a Mac IIci with 230 meg Quantum 
harddrive.

>
>No.  If you can, wait a while and see what happens with the newer
>systems coming out.  Now is a bad time to invest heavily in either
>architecture.  Of course, you can get some unbelievable deals right
>now, but a few years back you could get an incredible deal on a T.I.
>as well :->
>
>If you can't wait ... well, you have to think more about which you
>want to go with than just listenning to the Original Macintosh Bigot
>... and you probably could do better than taking just my advice as
>well.
>
>		---- tomster@wpi.wpi.edu

Well, I'm certain I got the best deal on the IIci money can buy. 
With student discounts and all, I got:

     Mac IIci with 5 megs RAM
     64k cache card
     230 meg Quantum harddrive
     13" RGB monitor
     mouse 
     extended keyboard

all for about $2750. 

I owe it to my alma mater.

-Chris Murphy

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: dmanning@cwis.unomaha.edu (Dave Manning)
Subject: Re: why apple and ibm will win
Keywords: apple ibm pink talgent microsoft
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:57:14 GMT

While it can be said that DEC may be hedging its bets with its NT deal, it can 
also be said DEC isn't completely stupid (well, maybe that's not fair :-). 
With the advent of OpenVMS on the Alpha platform, and the promise of a true
64-bit operating system in the form of OSF/1 next year, DEC seems to have a 
direction in mind -- 64-bit OS on a 64-bit chip. Microsoft is chugging away
at trying to produce a stable, worthwhile *32-bit* OS. Doesn't it seem odd
to anyone else that DEC would put that much stake into a half operating       
system -- except for the fact that they can sell more chips that way. :)

So the architect of VMS has developed NT. Big deal. The architect of the
Apple II now works at NeXT, and DEC's Alpha architect (or rather, one of them)
now works for Apple. Go figure.

Dave
--
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::  "D for dishes,				      Dave Manning	     ::
::    F for floors..."				dmanning@cwis.unomaha.edu    ::
:::::::::::::::::--Codeine:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:15:47 GMT

In article <zkk2#dq@rpi.edu> johnsd2@lib111.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:

>>You can't just abandon the rest of the world and start something new! 
>>(Look at NeXT, which is floundering in comparison to Mac and PC)  You
>>have to take small steps.  Companies don't take well to quick changes
>>(ie, entire computer systems (hardware and software) changing
>>overnight).  Like I said, Jobs did it, and while they have the best OS
>>around, no one's using it.
>
>I must disagree here.
>
>You can either takes steps so small as to keep you compatible
>(what PCs are doing) or takes steps so BIG you just make everything
>else look absolutely putrid (what the Mac did a long while ago);
>if you try to go in between (what the NeXT did- better than the Mac
>(debatable, I think it is in many ways better, in other ways not) and
>PC but not nearly enough so to leapfrog. But incompatible with what
>went before. Flop.
>
>			- Dan Johnson

Dan, please explain in what ways the Mac is better than the NeXT (aside
from the fact that there is more software available for Mac (doesn't mean
that software is better)). 

Answer two questions, take all the time you need:

From a design standpoint, in what ways is Mac better than NeXT?  

Why is NeXT's current advancement in Technology less amazing than what Mac
did some years back?

Eric


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:19:05 GMT

In article <168BBDAAD.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.193330.20088@squid9.cuc.ab.ca>
>terry@squid9.cuc.ab.ca (Terry Wilcox) writes:
> 
>>While Taligent is laboring to get Pink 1.0 ready, NeXT has the luxury
>>of adding interesting things to NeXTSTEP 4.0 and 5.0.
>>
>Hmm. I guess the combined resources of Apple and IBM won't be any
>help to Taligent? Yeah, NeXT could easily stay ahead of two giants,
>especially now that they'll be supporting two platforms. Don't
>expect NS 3.0 for awhile now that they'll be worrying over NS486.
> 

Considering IBM's other two OS's (AIX and OS/2), I really can't see
the value of help from IBM. Anyway, IBM will have its hands full
converting AIX and OS/2 to Mach.

Taligent will also have to support multiple platforms. Don't expect the
Mac version until the PowerPC version is done (or is it the other way
around.?)

NeXTSTEP 3.0 arrived months ago. I'm not waiting at all. :)

Terry Wilcox


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew R. Southwick)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:42:08 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew R. Southwick)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In <1992Dec14.195557.25818@athena.mit.edu> zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson) writes:

[Eric M Hermanson lists: "You never did show me..."]

>how seemlessly a Mac plugs into a Novell Network. 
-I have no data on this.  Anyone else?

>how quickly a 68030 Mac Powerbook Multitasks 12 applications running at the
>same time. 
-It's a portable.  Where is the NeXT portable?
-A 68030 Mac can run 12 apps at the same time, IF you have enough memory
-As far as quickly goes, it depends on the application.  Because of the 
co-op MT OS, fg apps should have a good amount of CPU time to use, and will 
not slow down appreciably. 
-NeXT withdrew their '030 box cuz it was too slow.  So why are we comparing 
'030's here?

>these "apple events" talking to each other in every application that you 
>own (which they can't do because software is not written to take advantage
>of apple events).
-It would be just so wonderful if FizzleDraw would communicate with my 
DinoWarriors game!  i.e. Apple Events are sometimes not worth the trouble 
and resulting end-user expense to implement for some applications.
-Yes, IAC is great.  WIBNI all current apps supported it.

>how simple it is to obtain data from a SYBASE database and incorporate it
>into one of your applications. 
-don't know.  Anyone else?

>the CD-quality sound (44kzH) coming out the the Powerbook speakers.
-I do not miss this.  In fact, I am glad I am not paying for it.  If I 
wanted good Multi-Media or sound, I would buy MIDI gear (actually, I already
have)

>drag and drop capability as far as changing text color, or sending folders
>in a multimedia mail message.
-good point

>the built in Webster dictionary on your hard drive.
-I do not miss this either, and am glad I am not paying for it.

>Mathematica bundled on your system when you buy it.
-Not missed.

>full MIDI and ISDN capability.
-MIDI capability can be bought for any Mac, yet some do have timing trouble,
which manifests itself while doing large sys-ex transfers.  Not all Macs 
have this problem.  If you are planning on using MIDI, it would make sense 
to look for a Mac that is fully compatible
-no data on ISDN

>I was about to show you the multitude of new software available for NeXT
>until you decided to end the learning experience and go out and buy an
>overpriced Quadra. (ugh).

-The rest of us are still here.  You can show use the multitude of new
software available for the NeXT.
-Overpriced Quadra?  If he bought it, it wasn't overpriced.  Read up on your
free market theory.

>Eric

"The 1980's were the me generation. The 1990's are the me-too generation."
                               - G. Donald Moncreaff
--------------------------------------------------------------
My views are my own; behaviorists can stick THAT up their ***!
Andrew R. Southwick
From: tracer@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Roger M. Wilcox)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More on mouse buttons
Date: 20 Dec 92 05:13:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Dec20.051349.3841
Organization: University of Oregon Computer and Information Sciences Dept.

In article <1992Dec12.101637.262@physc1.byu.edu> goblec@physc1.byu.edu writes:
>
>The Mac can use multi-button mice.  It leaves it as an option.
>Were the OS to use the second button it couldn't be optional.

WHAT?!?!?!??!!!!!


1) Every single 2-or-more-button mouse available on the Mac either has the
second button COMPLETELY DUPLICATE the first button, so that both merely
result in a straightforward mouseDown/mouseUp event with all the ordinary
modifiers set, or assigns the second button to emulate shift+click,
ctrl+click, propeller+click, etc..  There is no special rightMouseDown
or middleMouseDown event that it can generate.

2) Just because an OS supports something doesn't mean it's a requirement.
MacOS has supported hard drives for some time now; does that mean your
system HAS to have a hard drive?  Similarly, just because an OS *allows*
an application (or even its shell/finder) to use a right mouse button to
specify some sort of input doesn't mean that that application can't also have
another way to accomplish the same task WITHOUT needing a right button click.
This may surprise you, but the MS Windows Common User Access guidelines
(Windows' GUI style guide) specifies a keyboard-equivalent for nearly every
single mouse action -- a system DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO HAVE A MOUSE AT ALL to
use most applications!  Although, of course, most systems DO have mice and
all Windows applications DO do something consistent with mouse-based input.
And, of course, there are one-mouse-button equivalents specified in the C.U.A.
for clicks on the right button or the (as-of-yet-uncommon) middle mouse
button.  So no, having the OS use the right mouse button does NOT mean that
multi-button mice are no longer optional.

-- 
Roger *M.* Wilcox   (aka Jeff Boeing)
tracer@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu
Aleph null bottles of beer on the wall, aleph null bottles of beer, ...
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: lsr@taligent.com (Larry Rosenstein)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Organization: Taligent, Inc.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:07:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.233825.5352@cubetech.com>, andrew@cubetech.com wrote:
> 
> Where is the "joint" development??  It looks like IBM is getting
> Motorola to codevelop and fab their processors, and Apple is just

In terms of what I would consider joint development, Apple & IBM are
working together on the PowerPC architecture, networking products, and the
PowerOpen O/S.  I wouldn't consider Taligent or Kaleida Labs to be joint
development; both are separate companies doing their own development.

> independantly of eachother.  Some of this development apparently
> happens in the same building (Taligent HQ).  I guess that's the
> "joint" part.

None of the 3 things I mentioned above is happening at Taligent.

> This looks like an IBM-Motorola joint-venture with Apple going along
> for the ride as far as hardware goes.  As far as software, it doesn't

I think there are people from Apple directly working on the PowerPC  and on
the software side there is work on PowerOpen.

> NeXT has sold more than 10 times the number of Object Oriented
> Operating Systems than anyone else.  They are the standard for OO-OS.

A lot of people would not consider NeXT an OO-OS.  

In a lot of ways the OO part of NeXT is no substantially different from
MacApp on the Mac and Apple's been distributing MacApp longer than NeXT has
been in existence.  There probably has been 10 times as many MacApp app
sold as NeXT apps.

Larry Rosenstein
Taligent, Inc.

lsr@taligent.com
From: Jim.Redelfs@macnet.omahug.org (Jim Redelfs)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Comp.Sys.Mac.Advocacy Message Area
Date: 11 Dec 92 11:11:17 CST
Reply-To: jim.redelfs@macnet.omahug.org
Organization: Macnet Omaha
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy


This is the "Comp.Sys.Mac.Advocacy" message area.  Please confine discussion
to topics advocating Macintosh.

Messages in this area area relayed to numerous other systems.

Observe the numbers in the upper-right corner.  The FIRST number indicates the
current message.  The second number indicates the HIGHEST (last) message
available in this area.  If you would like to catch-up to the LAST message
available, enter its number at the next prompt.

MacNet Omaha Subscribers may post messages here and are encouraged to do so!

JR
                              Jim Redelfs
                            System Operator


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.hardware,comp.sys.mac.system
From: matoh@lysator.liu.se (Mats \hrman)
Subject: Re: why apple and ibm will win
Keywords: apple ibm pink talgent microsoft
Reply-To: matoh@lysator.liu.se
Organization: Lysator Academic Computer Society, Linkoping University, Sweden
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:49:00 GMT

wondertr@fraser.sfu.ca (wondertree learning center) writes:

>A very interesting note on the Microsoft-DEC alliance isa that the
>person heading the development of NT's was the same person who 
>responsible for the development of DEC's VMS operating system
>(his name escapes me right now)

Well, haven't you noticed that VMS++ = W(indows)NT?
(V+1=W, M+1=N, S+1=T) 

"Windos NT - takes VMS one step further!" Yeacch...


--
     _
Mats Ohrman     E-mail:   matoh@lysator.liu.se.se
From: andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 05:03:33 GMT

In article <josteisv.99.724036890@dhhalden.no> josteisv@dhhalden.no (JOSTEIN SVENDSEN) writes:
>Actually, NeXT was developed in the Apple Laboratories under the name Big 
>Mac. But Steve Jobs took this project with him when he left Apple. (Apple 
>didn't sue Steve of natural causes.)

This is totally untrue.  The only thing Steve and the other people
from Apple who formed NeXT took with them were ideas.  It was not
developed at "Apple Laboratories"...

> I'm sure PINK/Taligent won't have any 
>problems to match the other operating systems the days it's available.

How can you be sure?

>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Insanity is hereditary.  You get it from your kids.
>=============================================================================
>| Jostein Svendsen                      |                        PO Box 587 |
>| <josteisv@sofus.dhhalden.no>          |                     N-1754 HALDEN |
>| CS-Student, Ostfold Regional College  |                            NORWAY |
>=============================================================================


andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com      |  "C++'s runtime sucks shit!  Virtual functions
Andrew Loewenstern       |   can go straight to hell!"  - Ron Pomeroy
Cube Technologies, Inc.  |                   ForYourEyesOnly public key:
0000000701B61D1ADF0DFC9C16185CEA055200000007EB4A9FEB1922065D471A89E905B5
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: mflafeer@athena.mit.edu (Mohamed F. Lafeer)
Subject: Mac vs. NeXT (was Mac Multitasking?)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:16:36 GMT

I don't want you NeXT guys to think that I don't understand that there are
advantages to NeXTstep. It does have some really neat features. But those
features are not as dramatic as the advantage that Mac had over MS-DOS in
1987-88 that made the Mac as accepted as it is today.

I agree that the NeXT is great. But now that I am going into the real world
I have to make decisions based on more than just "get the best." 

Buying a Mac and buying/developing Mac software means more flexibility than
NeXT. Mac software runs on cheap computers, computers with big monitors and
68040s, and computers that weigh 4lbs and fit in a briefcase.

The Mac market is large. It is fed by hundreds of companies. It is not as
large as the PC market, but it is large enough to be stable and trustworthy.
Macs are not just found in advertising firms any more, they have found a 
place in every segment of the computer industry. 

If NS486 is everything you say it is, and if NS486 sells a million copies, 
then I'll look at NeXT and think about investing in it. 

NeXT is a small privately owned company. It does not have any significant
partners. Apple is a large, publicly-held company with a known stable financial
situation. Apple has significant dealings with another pair of large, stable,
publicly held companies, Motorola and IBM.

Who knows exactly what will happen in the computer market in the next few
years? All of this talk about NS486 sales, PowerOPEN, and Taligent are purely
speculation. The bottom line is that I need to solve certain business needs
for a certain set of small companies. Buying a Quadra to develop software
for a network of smaller, cheaper, Macintoshes makes sense for our company.
And it seems to me that Macs (and to an even greater degree PC's) make more
sense for more companies than buying a network of $6000 - $7000 NeXT machines.

In summary, I do not share your optimism about the future of NeXT in the
mainstream of computer users and purchasers. I think that MS-DOS, Windows, and
MacOS, and future derivatives of these systems are the present and future
mainstream. This is not to say that these OSes are better than NeXT or even
as good as NeXT. These are just market realities.
.

-Firoze