HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mike@ra.cs.umb.edu (Michael J. Thibodeau)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.comm,comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Could someone kindly answer a non-newbie's question?
Date: 24 Jan 93 06:48:59 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston, Dept of Math and CS

Recently I purchased a mac IIci 5/80 and much to my despair it came with
sys7.01 + tune up

this was purchased late Dec.92 picked up on Dec 24 just in time for Christmas!!

It was my understanding that Apple was in the practice of delivering the
current system software with new macintosh purchases. Has this changed?

Thank you for your time and effort.
-mike
   ==========================================================================
   #  Snail Mail       #    INTERNET     #  Give a man a fish and you feed  #
   # Michael Thibodeau #                 #  him for the day. Teach him how  #
   #  40 Brook Street  # mike@cs.umb.edu #   to fish and he will out fish   #
   # Scituate Ma 02066 #                 #    you nine times out of ten.    #
   ==========================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu (Garance A. Drosehn)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 00:52:56 GMT

howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes:
> bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB) writes:
> >Question:  Is the Pentium a CISC, CRISC, or RISC chip?
> >{CRISC is an intermediate stage between CISC and RISC; as such it is
> >faster then a CISC but not as fast as a true RISC. Its main advantage
> >is that it allows CISC instructions to be used without as much
> >rewriting as a RISC chip requires.}
> 
> These distinctions are becoming very blurred together, and soon won't
> be any more than buzzwords.  (Anyone remember the "Sure, it's a nice
> machine, but can it NETWORK?" stuff a few years ago? d;)
> 
> For example, the HP PA-RISC chip has 140 machine instructions in it's
> instruction set.  The original def. of RISC was (correct me if I'm
> wrong) Reduced Instruction Set Computer.  140 is more than many CISC
> chips have.
> 
> I believe now RISC refers to complexity more than anything else.  This
> would make CRISC mean Complex Reduced Instruction Set Complexity.

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.  Each instruction only does "little" tasks, as opposed to CISC  
instructions such as "translate and test" or "pack" and "unpack" (in IBM 360  
land) which actually do a fair amount of work for a single instruction.

--
Garance Alistair Drosehn     =     gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
ITS Systems Programmer            (handles NeXT-type mail)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;           Troy NY    USA
From: tjhendry@queen.mcs.drexel.edu (Jonathan Hendry)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 24 Jan 93 17:11:28 GMT
Organization: Drexel University, Dept. of Math. and Comp. Sci.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

Regarding the multiple NeXT cpu's-in-a-box:

The motherboards are fully useable NeXT's. You just can't hang a monitor
off them (not enough power-supply juice).

However, it is possible to run an app on one NeXT and have the interface
appear on another NeXT on a network. (the multiple cpus are connected 
via ethernet.)

All you have to do is type (from a Unix shell) 
"open YourApp.app -NXHost othermachine"

So you can have programs running on the other machine, but displaying
windows and taking keyboard and mouse data from your machine. Almost 
like X-windows, but better. It works by changing which postscript 
WindowServer is used for display. You can even run two Workspaces
at the same time (like two Finders).

--
Jonathan W. Hendry
Drexel University College Of Information Studies
Anderson Financial Systems "Programmer-in-Exile" :)
hendryjw@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu (No NEXTMail :( )
<set loose the marmosets!>
From: jaesyn@carson.u.washington.edu (Jason Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 22 Jan 1993 21:49:04 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: carson.u.washington.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.

>Eric

	So, the ADE will, what, replace NeXTStep?  Pre-empt it?  Lock it out?
Or will it create a whole new set of tools to have to deal with that aren't
supported at the OS level?  Great idea, but I'd rather have an integrated
OS that works from this.

	ps: Two years for Taligent?  I've now seen estimates from 10 months to
2 years, depending on the person posting: Mac fan or NeXT user.  Does anyone
have a *reliable* estimate?

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu (David Matthew Putzolu)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac dead?
Date: 23 Jan 93 05:43:58 GMT
Organization: The University of California at Davis
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d17
X-XXMessage-ID: <A7861B130801FD28@lestat.ucdavis.edu>
X-XXDate: Fri, 22 Jan 93 21:43:47 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.144753.10079@mailer.cc.fsu.edu> Douglas Taylor,
dtaylor@garnet.acns.fsu.edu 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.

At least the Mac users don't keep touting things like the EMPLANT, which
requires pirated Mac roms to emulate the Mac. Ooops, I forgot, there are
all the Amiga people who bought a new color Mac just to tear the ROMS out
of it, right? 

EMPLANT Mac emulation = Piracy (definitely not something to brag
about) or buying a new Macintosh in order to emulate it (what a dumb
idea!)

"I knew I should have gotten"                ______-==-______
"the new version of Rival..."    ____-------=----------------=-------____
           ________________  _ _-    --------________________--------
          (______________(_||_) _______ /
             /_____/_____            _-
Ex-Capt David Putzolu    \__________-
U.S.S. Yamato
Senior, CS & Psych, U.C.Davis - putzolu@cs.ucdavis.edu - my opinion
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 01:07:04 GMT

What all of you NeXT fans are missing is that if the Mac is a
dangerous, risky, and downright off-the-wall proposition to many
businesses, which it is, the NeXT is several orders of magnitude
worse off in most companies eyes.  Yes, there are exceptions, but
to most companies it seems that the NeXT is about as worthy of
consideration as an Amiga (ooh, that'll get the Commodore fans after
me :-) ).  Not that the next is not much more worthy of consideration,
but its marketshare is probably even less than that of the Amiga.  Also,
the QUANTITY of business apps on the NeXT is probably not much better.

NeXT is a wicked unknown to many.  Just as no one ever go fired for buying
an MS-DOS PC (as the saying goes), there is no assurance that someone won't
get fired for buying a NeXT, especially if there marketshare doesn't
expand exponentially.


Jess Holle
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ahchan@rd.hydro.on.ca (Arthur Chan)
Subject: Large screen for Mac IICi and MacX
Organization: "Ontario Hydro - Research Division"
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 16:35:04 GMT


I am not sure I am posting this question to the right group.  In any case, I am
using MacX on my IICi and found the 13" screen to small.  I understand that
Radus (Sp?) makes 17 and 19" monitors and drivers for the Mac.  My question is:
will I have any problem running MacX on the big screen?  Please share your
experience.  Thank you in advance.

Arthur Chan

-- 
Arthur Chan
Operations Research
KR297 (6173)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 22:03:36 GMT


If I am not mistaking the gist of your long drawn out post, T. Wilcox,
you seem to be denigrating the IRIS Indigo as compared to the NeXT.

For any graphically intense work, the IRIS machines are unparalled
IMHO.  They have a simple Graphics Language which allows 3D animation
at real time speeds with no programming effort.  It can do curves and
surfaces with Gourard shading effortlessly.  I could go on, but.....

The NeXT, SUN, Mac, PC, and Amiga all do not compare in this regard
by even the furthest stretch of the imagination.


Jess Holle
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC, MAC or Amiga?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:44:43 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <gel212.727799334@rigaud>, gel212@gel.ulaval.ca (gif19268 Systemes numeriques avances) writes:
>     Hi everybody! Help me with this difficult (but classical) decision:
> 
>     MAC, PC or keep my Amiga?
> 
>     Here is a resume of what I personnally think are the strengths and
>     weaknesses of each of these three platforms:

[ deleted ]

In retrospect, I took a look at your resumes again, and it dawned on me that
you left out an entire class of information regarding your computer purchase.

What the heck are you going to use it for?

A decision on which computer system to buy rests largely on the requirements
of the user, not the capabilities of the system. 

I say, buy whatever system meets your present (and near term) needs for the
best price. If you look at this question realistically, and don't get bogged
down in the feature / feature breakdown, I think you'll find that you have 
your answer already.

Don't get too wrapped up in speed or performance issues. While these are
certainly easy to measure, they don't really amount to much in real life.
Spell out your performance requirements in honest terms, don't just say,
"the fastest possible." 

My point is, it isn't what the computers can or cannot do -- the question is,
what do you need them to do?

-- 
Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958
Principal Software Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QO
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcoleman
POB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   ! Internet: bcoleman%hayes@uunet.uu.net
Disclaimer: "My employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."
Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve Hackett.
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
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 10:28:16 GMT
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95
NNTP-Posting-Host: stein.u.washington.edu

At some of the prices people are throwing around, you can expand your
horizons.  HP has some workstations in those price ranges that will blow
the socks off NeXT and Macintosh for speed.

$5000 is also around what you can get a complete Sparc for from Sun.

--Tim Smith
From: ifbb657@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Date: 25 Jan 1993 11:56:41 -0600
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
NNTP-Posting-Host: emx.cc.utexas.edu

In article <1993Jan24.214840.18202@netcom.com> howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey) writes:
>In article <1juuphINN9fc@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> ifbb657@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd) writes:

(My post about suns deleted)

>Gotta take exception here.  You can FTP *FREE* more and better SW for
>a Sun than you can currently buy for a Mac.  SunOS is run at almost
>every University campus, and hence, amost any UNIX SW will compile on
>a Sun.  For example, I just ported our companies product to SunOS in 3
>weeks, whereas the HP port took 1.5 months.  The product used 3 third
>party libs and has 802 *.c files.  SunOS is a good implementation of UNIX.
>
>A/UX (2.0 at least) is a notoriously bad implementation of UNIX.  Try
>porting to it and you will understand why.
>
>3.0 may be better.  I don't know.

(Howard's .sig noshed)

A little note:  Not EVERYONE has internet access.

PS:  A/UX 3.0 (to my knowledge) is an excellent version of UNIX, if you
like Macs.  Suns are OK, if you are primarly UNIX based.

Any computer company that leaves big, wide security holes like Sun does
with shipping systems should be beaten with a wet noodle until dead.
(Anyone remember the + + in the hosts.equiv file?)

I have used Suns for two years, and am unfortuantly using one now for
this post.  They are slow, smelly "workstations" that cost a lot, and
do not really perform well unless you are using it for some computation-
intensive task like rendering.  Suns are NOT good for general computing.
If you do general computing, (word processing, spreadsheets, etc.) go
with NeXT if you like UNIX, A/UX if you like Mac and UNIX, or Mac/MS-DOS/
Win if you do not care about UNIX.

Speaking of "workstations".  I can get more done (3d stuff, etc.) with
the university's IIfx than I could get done with their Sparc 2.

All computers have their following.  Sun has its following, but I do
not think I am joining their ranks soon.  I like not wasting on my
money for a fast processor that will be noshed by the Pentium or the
68060 in a year.

Sorry for the long-windedness.

PS:  To upgrade to system 7, you double click and run an app.  Win NT, same
way.  Sun OS????  You backup your hard drives, reformat and install the
"upgrade" from scratch and then restore your files.

PS#2:  I just realized I am not using a sun for this message.  Happy, happy,
joy, joy. :-).



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu (Yan Fang/Humanities)
Subject: Re: Mac vs NeXT was Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center Student Mail Machine
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 19:59:38 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?

Probably RAM and disk space. 

A server with 8 MBs of RAM and a 230 MB hard drive? Not on _my_ network,
thank you.

Hell, my personal data on my NeXTstation Color 16/400 takes up a
good 100 MBs _at least_. Multiply that by ten users and you're looking at a GB
just to stay afloat. 8/230 is barely a personal system, let alone a
network server.

A NeXT--or a Sun--is a far, far better Mac server than _any_ Quadra
shipping today. Unix is the key. Ask Apple: the new Quadra 800 will come
configured with A/UX 3.0 and should be at least a tolerable server.


-- 
Yan Fang-Magnusson
Ph.D. candidate, philosophy, University of Utah
yf5990@u.cc.utah.edu
yanfang@cc.utah.edu (NeXTmail)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: rtaylor@cie.uoregon.edu (Russ Taylor)
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 23 Jan 93 15:06:41 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <aggie-200193204326@wealthy.ocean.fsu.edu>  writes:
>In article <1993Jan20.205213.8189@rchland.ibm.com>,
>tmaas@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Anthony Maas) wrote:
>>
>> In article <ocaoXB1w165w@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca>,  
jkalanuk@bbs.draco.bison.mb.ca (Jeremy Kalanuk) writes:
>> |>
>> |> I've use a couple nexts, and I wasn't very impressed.  The speed is
>> |> nothing compared to a Quadra because of the overhead of the NeXT os.   
The
>> |> interface is annoying, as well as the two button mouse.  There is  
nowhere
>>                                          *****************
>>
>> Two buttons too complicated?
>
>No, the second is usually redundant. How many app's actually use
>the second one??


All of them.  To do the same thing:  pull down the menu.


--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.advocacy:3952 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:4063
From: ifbb657@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Douglas Floyd)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Mac vs Win NT
Date: 27 Jan 1993 10:12:49 -0600
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: emx.cc.utexas.edu


What are the advantages of Win NT over System 7, and the other way
around?

This is assuming that MS has not pushed back the ship date until the next
contraction/expansion of the universe :-).

I know that NT should be pretty virus resistant because of its protected
mode providing you do not log on as "admininstrator" all the time.

PS:  When WILL NT ship, and would it work with a 386-33?

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: 486 vs. Mac Benchmarks
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 06:36:26 GMT

[long details about various $20,000 computer systems deleted]

If you REALLY want a powerful graphics machine and have $20,000, you
could consider an SGI.  Real time 3D transformations, hidden surface
removal, super-smooth animation, etc, etc, all with a very simple
programmers interface.

If you have $20,000 to throw around, you should be considering a lot
more than just the Mac, PC, and NeXT platforms.


Jess Holle
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: OS/2, not the dream OS?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 02:54:41 GMT

On 386's here, there have been a couple of observations about OS/2:

1)  It takes MINUTES to load Word and Excel.
2)  There is no nice little watch cursor or any other feedback that
    things are actually being loaded.
3)  There is no easy way to see what programs are all running (at least not
    an obvious one).
4)  It is very easy to confuse iconicizing with quitting and thereby
    inflict marvelous thrashing upon the disk until the swap space is
    full.  The Mac has been accused of this problem, but the worst that
    happens there is leaving one copy of each program running (which the
    Finder will let you quit at the click of OK when memory runs low).
    New users often leave 5 copies of Word running.

These are the observations of novices, professors, etc.  Perhaps they
will suddenly love the machines and all confusion will cease in the
near future.  In the mean time, OS/2 is SO easy to use?????  It doesn't
seem so.


Jess Holle
From: kaya@world.std.com (Kaya Bekiroglu)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* w
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 00:58:28 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.205949.21863@gallant.apple.com> bell@apple.com (Mike Bell) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.192352.21285@athena.mit.edu>, zmonster@athena.mit.edu 
>(Eric M Hermanson) writes:
>
>> 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
>
>
>On the Mac, we call it ClarisWorks......
>

And we know exactly what to call the Mac, too. :)

Seriously, can you elaborate on this?  

>
>
> -Mike
>
>
>********************************************************
>
>Mike Bell										     	       	      email: bell@apple.com
>Senior Engineer
>68000 High Performance Software Group
>MS 60-CS
>Apple Computer, Inc.
>20525 Mariani Ave.
>Cupertino, CA 95014
>
>********************************************************


-- 
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]