HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: Mac vs. NeXT (was Mac Multitasking?)
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 07:18:21 GMT

In article <168C1F280.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.193836.7297@cuug.ab.ca>
>wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
> 
>>
>>In article <1992Dec14.231636.522@athena.mit.edu> mflafeer@athena.mit.edu (Mohamed F. Lafeer) writes:
>>>.
>>
>>I hope NeXT never goes mainstream. Mainstream means an inability to innovate.
>>Your user base is too large and they don't want change. Mediocrity sets in.
>>
>So I guess this means you are against Nexts move into the intel
>world with NS486?

It wouldn't happen if Steve Jobs still calls the shots.  If NeXT sold
70 million copies of NS486 in the next two years and 3000 new Apps
came out, Steve would still have no qualms about making NeXTSTEP 4.0
totally incompatible with NS 3.0 if there were enough innovation in
it.

Yes, this really sucks if you are a user, and I don't agree with this
guy on some things, and he doesn't always reign supreme at NeXT, but
that's the way he is sometimes.


andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com      | "I'm allergic to cigarette smoke, but THIS
Andrew Loewenstern       |  kind of smoke I can handle!"
Cube Technologies, Inc.  |  John Draper, aka Captain Crunch Dec 18, 1992
0000000701B61D1ADF0DFC9C16185CEA055200000007EB4A9FEB1922065D471A89E905B5
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: cole@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Sandra Stewart-Cole)
Subject: Re: illegal mac emulation
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:04:34 GMT

In <92355.215340CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:

>There is an Amiga product called EMPLANT that allows you to emulate
>a MACII on an Amiga if you have a copy of the roms on a file in your HD or on 
a
> disk. The product itself has a simm slot so you can copy a MACII rom sim onto
>a disk to use this emulation product. isn't this illegal? Shouldn't Apple know
>about this? If so who should I contact? This product promotes the piracy of
>the Apple OS. I believe it should be stopped.



        Are you SURE the Emplant even can handle the Mac // ROMs? last I heard,
no Mac emulator was geared up for anything more then the Mac Plus ROMs. And in
an earlier version, the Emplant required the ROM to be hardware... are you 
positive it now has a way of using the ROM code in a file? (i.e. have you seen
it work, or does the maker specificly say that it can) 

        Sure, anyone with a Mac ROM dumped to disk with the intention of using
the code is at least in technical violation of the law, just as anyone who 
checks out a CD from a library and tapes it is. (I kid you not) Whether the 
Emplant folks are really doing anything illegal is a totally different matter.
There is also the issue of ROM availability. In theory, anyone possessing a 
M<ac ROMset beyond the SE needs to have purchased the rest of the Mac also, or
else someone along the line has broken a license. If you look at any latter-day
Apple license agreements that come with the Mac, and show them to a lawyer, 
explaining that there is software conmtained within hardware (ROM) inb the 
machine, you will find that it is in theory illegal to yank out your own ROMs 
and sell them. It is certainly impossible these days to find replacement ROMs 
for anything beyond a Plus unless you have a trade-in set. 

As for who to contact, you can be sure someone at Apple is fully aware of the 
Emplant. They have probably even looked into the legal technicalities of whther
the device itself can be banned or if only the end user is really breaking the
law (just as VCR's and cassete recorders are legal, but are used in technically
illegal ways) 

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle)
Subject: Re: illegal mac emulation
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:59:32 GMT

jrg@punch (James R. Goble) writes:

>In article <92355.215340CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:
>> There is an Amiga product called EMPLANT that allows you to emulate
>> a MACII on an Amiga if you have a copy of the roms on a file in your HD  
>or on a
>>  disk. The product itself has a simm slot so you can copy a MACII rom  
>sim onto
>> a disk to use this emulation product. isn't this illegal? Shouldn't  
>Apple know
>> about this? If so who should I contact? This product promotes the piracy  
>of
>> the Apple OS. I believe it should be stopped.

If I buy a copy of the Mac OS at retail--where is the piracy?

If Apple cared, they would have been down on Sandy & Dave Small for the
Spectre GCR, the Atari ST Mac emulator 3 or 4 years ago, before Dave
made a small fortune.  But Dave hadn't heard word one as of last
November, so I think they have no worries about it.  

The GCR uses 128K ROMs, so there is as definite a license as there was
for the late lamented Outbound.

	Alex
-- 
		Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker
		Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others
		...elroy!grian!alex; voice: (818) 791-7979
		fax: (818) 794-2297  bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 2400/12/3 
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 02:52:52 GMT

In article <lsr-231292180354@lsr.taligent.com> lsr@taligent.com (Larry Rosenstein) writes:
>Apple is betting that working with IBM will increase the change that Pink
>succeeds.  It would rather have 50% of a system that has a significant
>market share than 100% of a system that has no market share.


	So.

	When can we expect Pink?

	Even more importantly, when can we expect a better name?
	"Pink" reminds me of toilet paper.  I'd hate to buy a sexy
	new PowerPC and run an OS that reminds me of Married With Children.

	Or worse--bubble gum.

	(:-)'s for the humor crippled..)

-- 
       "If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"
     Equality is a delusion, suffering is a fairy tale and God is a fantasy.
                 Buy American as if your job depended on it.
       Blaming society for inequality is like blaming the sky for rain.
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multiple button mice vs keys(was:Macintosh advocacy (really!))
Date: 22 Dec 92 09:03:30 GMT
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <1992Dec22.045855.3885@dtint.uucp>, nevin@dtint.dtint.com says:
>
>I have a NeXT, which ships with a two-button mouse.  As shipped, the default
>configuration for the NeXT is that the right button does exactly the same
>thing
>as the left.  Hence, in the default configuration, the mouse is essentially a
>one-button mouse.  However...
>
>In my current preferred configuration, I have the application menu dragged
>completely off the screen (i.e., more screen real-estate for the app), plus I
>have the right mouse button configured to pop the menu up under the cursor
>whenever I push the button.  Thus, the application menu is instantly
>accessable
>where ever the mouse is, without having to go to the title bar like other
>like other systems require (and NO monitor is ever BIG enough!), I guess you

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I've learned the following from
this group:
You are making a big mistake with that configuration 'cause Apple's says
the way the MAC is operated (which is NeXT's factory default) is the easiest
possible way. Everything else is less ergonomic. I.e. you can't even know you
have a system menu when you can't see it on the screen. Having a popup menu
with no visible clue is misleading.
So working with your configuration is harder than necessary, I suggest you
change it back to factory default.

If your experience is contrary to what Apple says, its your fault not Apple's.

Michael Bode
From: hulsej@sun.lclark.edu (Jose Hulse)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: To PC or not to PC (games on Macs vs. PCs)
Date: 23 Dec 92 05:22:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: lclark.1992Dec23.052226.1911
Distribution: usa
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR


(I posted this to comp.sys.mac.games before to see if it would elicit
comments, now I realize that I should have posted here as well, of course.)

Being a dedicated MacGamer myself, I must concur with the call for
x-wing.   However, given the precipitous drop in prices for fully configured
PC-Clone systems recently and comparing those prices with the prices of 
Mac acceleration options (notably the Daystar PowerCache, which doesn't even
come in '040 "flavor" yet), I'm starting to (shudder) seriously consider
keeping my Mac for the undemanding (computer-wise) real work and just biting
the bullet and getting a 486DX 33 system from Gateway 2000. (Aargh! I can
hear you all scream).  Seriously though, even when games are ported over to
the Mac, who has the computing power to even run them (especially
simulators)?  Look at Red Baron.  I like the game itself, but in order to
play it with all the detail on at "full" screen (640x400), one would need
to have a Quadra 950!!  Alas, I have only an unaccelerated SE/30 with ext.
color monitor.  True, there are a lot more Macs and a lot more color macs
out there than there used to be, but let's face facts, they aren't Quadras,
in the main.  "But look at Hellcats, the PC world doesn't have that"  I love
Hellcats too, and I am keeping my Mac, but we used to say the same thing
about Spectre, and a mere year later it's on the PC.

I realize that none but the most hardcore gamer will plunk down a couple of
grand for a whole other computer to be used mainly for game playing, (and
especially for rapidly obsolescing intel x86 hardware), but I kid you not,
I was quoted a price of $1995 for a fully configured sytem (svga monitor
w 1 meg VRAM on card, 270 Mb IDE (yuck) hard drive, 5.25 and 3.5" HD floppies,
Microsucks mouse, Dos 5 and Windows 3.1 installed, plus other software). 
Of course, the way things are going, it probably makes more sense
just to rent the stuff, as my wife suggests, otherwise you end up taking
a real bath...

I also realize that getting a lot of things up and running on a PC (or at
least under MessyDOS) can be the biggest pain, and you need to get a sound-
card, etc. but considering there's stuff like Falcon 3.0 and Comanche out
there, I'm beginning to think it's worth it.

What do you all think?  Please post.

-Jose'

-- 
_______________________________________________
Jose' Hulse  hulsej@lclark.edu |  Four years ago, Bush said that if I voted 
for Dukakis I could expect crime,taxes and the deficit to go up.
I guess he was right...I voted for Dukakis and look what happened!
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 2 Jan 93 12:46:53 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1h70apINNqal@pith.uoregon.edu>, bjorn@darmok.uoregon.edu (Bjorn S. Fjeld Pettersen) writes:
> In article <6580.2b34cf2e@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>> It is not the fault of the system software that certain applications aren't
>> written according to guidelines. It is the fault of the application  
> developer.
>> 
>> Moral: blame Microsoft, not Apple.
> 
> Although I would agree to blame Microsoft for a lot, this is not one of them.  
> The term multitasking means that the operating system takes care of running  
> several processes/programs etc. at the same time 

Agreed. And that is exactly what System 7 does.

> -- making sure that everyone  
> gets a fair amount of time and that no _one_ program/process can crash the  
> entire machine.

This latter qualification only shows your personal bias on the nature of
multitasking systems.

System 7 will give everyone a "fair" amount of time as long as all applications
follow the guidelines.

As for a single program / process crashing not bringing down the whole system,
even systems with fully memory protection are not entirely impervious to this
action -- but the nature of memory protection is wholly and entirely 
independant from multitasking.

-- 
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.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccsouth11.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccsouth11.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 02:03:40 GMT

In article 1h70apINNqal@pith.uoregon.edu, bjorn@darmok.uoregon.edu (Bjorn S. Fjeld Pettersen) writes:
[deletia- yup, here we go again]
>> Moral: blame Microsoft, not Apple.
>> 
>
>Although I would agree to blame Microsoft for a lot, this is not one of them.  
>The term multitasking means that the operating system takes care of running  
>several processes/programs etc. at the same time -- making sure that everyone  
>gets a fair amount of time and that no _one_ program/process can crash the  
>entire machine.

All I can say is that you seem to have a slightly odd definition of
multitasking. Why tack on all the extra stuff?

---
			- 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.
From: SML108@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: illegal mac emulation
Date: 3 Jan 93 18:39:27 GMT
 c.harvard.edu><92363.004631CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <ibhan.725580555@husc.harvard.edu>
Organization: Penn State University

In article <ibhan.725580555@husc.harvard.edu>, ibhan@husc10.harvard.edu (Ishir
Bhan) says:
>
><CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>
>>The bad part about emplant is that you use a copy of the roms and not the
>roms
>>themselves. So most Amiga users are pirating the roms.  As for the Emplant.
>>The price on it is about $250.00. It works with Amiga 2xxx,3xxx and 4xxx.
>>It also works in color. So it is a threat.

It's no threat, the atari ST has had almost flawless mac+ emulation since
1987 and look where they are...  The amiga will not be made or broken on
its ability to be a mac II but it's nice to hear that it can do it...
If only you guys could get Irving Gould to move to Apple then you might
make a difference...

Scott
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 08:02:07 GMT

In article <lsr-181292152644@lsr.taligent.com> lsr@taligent.com (Larry Rosenstein) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.171029.9443@cuug.ab.ca>, wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance
>Wilcox 229-3361) wrote:
>> 
>> but it still takes a lot more time and effort to write quality software on a 
>> Mac than on a NeXT. The NeXT's main advantage is its full-featured appkit.
>> TCL and MacApp simply aren't there yet.
>
>If that was true, then wouldn't there be more NeXT apps shipping?  The
>machine has been out for 4 years or so.  Also, MacApp is a full featured
>application framework.  It does take a different approach in that it
>concentrates on details, while NeXT's kits concentrate on breadth.  For
>example, MacApp defines a document and command processing model, but does
>not include a text or sound kit.

I think that's the biggest load of BS I have ever heard from you,
Larry.  Doesn't concentrate on depth?  WHERE?  I have found that in
areas that NeXT has created a kit, they have coverd it very, very
well.

Not all apps are document oriented.  Also, the implementation of a
document varies so widely from application to application that a
generic document object would be so abstract as to be almost useless.
What exactly does the MacApp document class do?  Things like menu
enabling and other context sensitive operations are handled by the
Application object and object delegates.

MacApp also doesn't have IndexingKit, 3DKit, DataBaseKit, PhoneKit,
DistributedObjects, MusicKit, a language with full dynamic binding,
threads, memory zones, fast IPC with copy-on-write direct memory
mapping and unlimited message size, something as good as
InterfaceBuilder, protocols, Display PostScript, and a whole lot of
other things that make writing software faster and easier on NeXTSTEP.

There aren't a lot of shrinkwrap apps available for NeXTSTEP because
most companies don't write software when there aren't many people
available or willing to buy them, no matter how easy it is.  But, a
*lot* of apps are being written for NeXTSTEP that you and I will never
be able to buy (read: custom apps).  Why?  Because it's easier on
NeXTSTEP than on Macintosh, Windows (what is worse than Windows?), or
X.


andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com      | "I'm allergic to cigarette smoke, but THIS
Andrew Loewenstern       |  kind of smoke I can handle!"
Cube Technologies, Inc.  |  John Draper, aka Captain Crunch Dec 18, 1992
0000000701B61D1ADF0DFC9C16185CEA055200000007EB4A9FEB1922065D471A89E905B5
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 22 Dec 92 09:29:09 GMT
 <c3g503ATc19m00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <6580.2b34cf2e@hayes.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <6580.2b34cf2e@hayes.com>, bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) says:
>
>You are incorrect. System 7 does multitask. Alas, Excel
>does not multitask during recalculations.
>
>It is not the fault of the system software that certain applications aren't
>written according to guidelines. It is the fault of the application developer.
>
>Moral: blame Microsoft, not Apple.

No blame both. If there weren't other concepts to multitasking than cooperative
you could blame only MS for not following the guidelines. But as things are,
there _are_ other concepts and Apple _could_ have decided to implement those.
Even MS can show them how to do so.

Michael Bode
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: NeXT vs Mac - Whats the real difference?
From: athomson@otago.ac.nz (Alastair Thomson)
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:26:07 +1300
Organization: University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

-- 
===============================================================================
                                    |
Alastair Thomson,                   | Phone +64-3-479-8347
University of Otago,                | Fax   +64-3-479-8529
Department of Computer Science,     | e-mail athomson@otago.ac.nz
P.O. Box 56                         |
Dunedin                             |
New Zealand                         |

===============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jrg@punch (James R. Goble)
Subject: Re: illegal mac emulation
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation; El Segundo, CA
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:39:45 GMT

In article <92355.215340CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> CTLCC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:
> There is an Amiga product called EMPLANT that allows you to emulate
> a MACII on an Amiga if you have a copy of the roms on a file in your HD  
or on a
>  disk. The product itself has a simm slot so you can copy a MACII rom  
sim onto
> a disk to use this emulation product. isn't this illegal? Shouldn't  
Apple know
> about this? If so who should I contact? This product promotes the piracy  
of
> the Apple OS. I believe it should be stopped.

Lighten up Francis!

If Apple saw this insignificant little piece of hardware as a threat, you  
can bet that they would have all ready had their attorneys address the  
problem.  Apple doesn't need you to get your panties in a twist on their  
behalf.

Jim Goble,
Los Angeles
From: rpomeroy@aunext1.amd.com (Ron Pomeroy x(Coop))
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:01:43 GMT
Reply-To: rpomeroy@aunext1.amd.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas

How can Mac folks NOT like NeXTs (at least a little) ?  They came
from the same mind.
--
Ronald Pomeroy		[Objective-Cruntime: [Smalltalk runtime]];
Advanced Micro Devices	[self dream-on];
CAM Applications Group
rpomeroy@aunext1.amd.com (NeXTmail preferred)
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: Mac & NeXT camp
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:03:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.225449.15462@scott.skidmore.edu> dbourass@scott.skidmore.edu (darlene bourassa) writes:
>
>I'm sure you showed ML all of the manuals that come standard with
>next's unix? How about the ones with the next.
>

Everything's on line and indexed. You can also use the man command if you're
Unix-happy. Even the development stuff is on-line. How about those
Inside Macintosh books? Boy are they a good deal or what?

>
>how about all of the multiple monitors you can put onto a next...
>

If you've got a cube, you can have as many monitors as a IIci.

>
>I'm sorry, but mac is just a better deal for a student. I can do so
>much more with my IIci and Plaze NT than I have seen done on a next
>for the price I paid(4200 bucks)
>

If you haven't used a NeXT, how can you say you can do more on your IIci?
More than you've seen done maybe. I can do more on my NeXT than I have
seen done on a Quadra 950, because I've never seen a 950.

The IIci probably was a better deal for a student, if all you need is
an 030. If you want a low end machine, don't buy a NeXT.

Terry Wilcox