From: waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu
Subject: Re: Byte: Is Unix Dead ?
Organization: CAPVAX, JHU/APL
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 20:27:24 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.225125.13807@resonex.com>, zenon@resonex.com (Zenon 
Fortuna) writes:
> In the September's issue of Byte, Tom Yager and Ben Smith give an excellent
> (IMHO) story about prognoses of the struggle of Unix and Windows NT.
> In many places they mention NeXTSTEP and even quote statements of Avadis
> Tevanian.

	[...some interesting samples deleted...]

> The table illustrating the GUIs, has 3 examples: at the bottom the Windows NT,
> in the middle the SVR4.2's OSF/Motif, and at the top the NeXTSTEP, already
> from 3.0 version.
> 
> The analysis shows also the strong potential of the SVR4.2 included in the
> USL (Unix Software Laboratories) & Univel offering.
> 
> The conclusion: "Unix has a rich history. If the new pack of Unix vendors can
> keep from bickering among themselves, Microsoft will face a strong competitor
> of NT."
	I believe Byte (not for the first time) misses the point(s).  UNIX
	vendor bickering has already caused them to miss their chance.  The
	applications aren't there...they're on MS-DOS and, to a lesser degree,
	on Macs.  OS vendors need applications in order to compete with other
	OSs.  MicroSofts NT (even the developers version available today) runs
	MS-DOS applications, Windows applications, POSIX applications and
	native Windows NT applications.  It will be able to display (and
	probably run) X applications as well.  And it will be able to run
	on Intel, MIPS and DEC Alpha boxes with OS-based RAIDS disk support.
	The cost of a DEC Alpha PC (which I believe was to be around 40-50
	SPECmarks) is expected to be under $4000.  The OS wars are already
	over and NT has won unless other vendors provide the same
	compatibility (MS-DOS, Windows, POSIX and native Windows NT--not to
	mention OS/2 applications which NT also supports) and seamless
	interoperation with NT and NT applications (that is, support the NT
	API across platforms).  Oh, and an object-oriented environment is also
	well along in its development.

	NeXTSTEP 486 is no answer.  If the OS wars weren't already won, it
	would have been a good ploy...letting NeXTSTEP converts keep their
	old 486 boxes a little longer as they brought in their new black
	boxes and replaced the old 486s as quickly as budgets allowed.  But
	the companies or departments or work groups who can get by with just
	NeXTSTEP applications are very few.

	But, as I suggested in a previous post, there is a wonderful
	opportunity for NeXTSTEP.  It is portable.  It is object-oriented.  It
	is beautifully conceived.  It is easy to develop applications for it
	after you've climbed the learning curve.  Further, the applications
	are of higher quality and the interface is better.  If users are
	using NeXTSTEP and Windows applications side-by-side on the same
	machine, which will they prefer?  That's the way NeXTSTEP--and its
	application vendors--would win.  In a fair, one-on-one, side-by-side
     	slugfest with the other guys.

	But that can't happen--unless NeXTSTEP is ported to NT.  If NeXTSTEP
	is ported to NT and co-existed with the MS-DOS, Windows, etc.,
	environments, then the market would be millions of platforms well before
	the end of the decade.

	But is this possible?  So far as the OS is concerned, NT probably has
	all the features needed by NeXTSTEP.  I suspect the stickiest wicket
	is Display PostScript.  And that's probably only a serious problem if
	you require NeXTSTEP and the other NT environments to share the screen.
	But it is doable.  The way it should be done is, when NeXTSTEP is
	brought up, the Dock and Workspace Manager should come up as usual.
	It should be possible to use Workspace Manager to start any application
	regardless of whether it is MS-DOS, Windows, etc., or a NeXTSTEP
	application.  

	Now THAT'S the way I'd like my application to be able to compete with 
	those other guys.  Trouble is now, they can write a mediocre 
	application (not that some of them aren't really good applications) for
	MS-DOS or Windows and make a bundle because the market is so huge.  A
	NeXT developer can write a dynamite application, penetrate a large
	percentage of the NeXT market and make much less than his/her MS-DOS or
	Windows counterpart.

	That's the software side.  What about the hardware side?

	Well, of course, NeXT's automated factory could as easily turn out NT
	boxes as Mach boxes and they could sell them to everyone including
	buyers interested only in NT (for now).  For NeXT, it's a win, win
	situation.  For NeXT application vendors, it's a bonanza!!

	So why aren't you developers being heard from?  Appsoft?  Pages?
	Stone?  Lighthouse?  Time's a wastin'.  I believe it's a matter of
	survival, folks.  Help NeXT set their priorities.  Mission
	Critical Apps wouldn't be affected by whether the underlying OS were
	Mach or NT--might even be helped by it.  By now, it should
	be clear that Mission Critical Apps are a niche not a panacea.  NeXT
	needs its developers if it is move forward.  Developers need a level
	playing field (or at least one that isn't so much up-hill for them).
	NeXTSTEP on NT would tilt the field in NeXT's favor and in favor of
	the NeXT developers.


	[...]

c.f.waltrip

Internet:	<waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu>

Opinions expressed are my own.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy