From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: Need to convince boss 486's are *not* way to go...
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:49:18 GMT

In article <1993Jan18.012722.23935@athena.mit.edu> mflafeer@athena.mit.edu (Mohamed F. Lafeer) writes:
>I am neither a Mac advocate nor a NeXT advocate. I am involved in a project
>where we are choosing a number of 20-30 computer networks for custom apps 
>as well as general business productivity. We have users, administrators and 
>programmers who have experience with NeXT, Mac, DOS, UNIX, Windows. Our team
>includes one staunch NeXT advocate. I know that some of you NeXT fans are
>going to be very suprised, but we're going with the Mac.
>

I'm not surprised at all. You've been bragging about that for a month.
Somehow I knew you would bring it up again.

>The NeXT is not as fast as you guys say it is. We bought 3 machines for
>evaluation purposes: A NeXTstation, a Quadra, and a Mac IIci. Our impression
>is that in general use the NeXT is no faster than the IIci. It does *certain*
>things faster. It can probably calculate a satellite trajectory faster. It
>can move windows faster. But when it comes to general business use: opening
>files, starting applications, saving files, etc, the Quadra seems faster.

It's actually a Mac guy saying NeXT is faster than everybody else. NeXT users
know that a real multi-tasking system will feel slower than a single tasking
sysytem. As for starting applications, I leave mine going all the time.
Saving files depends on the application, as does opening them. Try launching
PasteUp. The term is 'blindingly fast'. If all there is to business is
playing with files, I'm in. :)

>NS486: 
>Early in the project we were told that NS486 would be perfect for us. But
>it is an unproven technology. It may be based on version 3.1 for the 68040,
>but as far as I am concerned it is version 1.0 for the 486. It also is very
>expensive. It will cost $1000 for users, $2500 for developers, plus the 
>extra cost of at least 16megs of RAM (I saw one faq which said more), a large
>hard drive, and a fast drive controller. And we still haven't seen it.

Why don't you ask for a demo. Many NeXT user groups are giving NS486 demos.
You could try asking NeXT for a beta copy. Did your team make any effort
to see NS486 or did you brush it off as 'unproven technology'.

>I have talked with a few NeXT fans who read this group as well as a few
>Mac fans about this project. The NeXT fans think I'm a Mac fan and the Mac fans
>think I'm a NeXT fan. This is because when I investigate something I like
>to play devil's advocate. But it is true that when I gathered my *initial*
>research, we were all but certain that we would go with NeXT. But months
>of real evaluation have changed that.

I doubt that any literate person would mistake you for a NeXT fan.

>They told me the NeXT was extremely stable, but we crashed ours just by 
>changing the log in screen (we had to completely reinstall all the software)

Wow. You must have really screwed something up. All you have to do is
type one line. How tough can that be?

>Our machine still doesn't boot without typing bsd. The NeXT answerline said
>it was a bad controller card. Our NeXT dealer says there is no such thing.
>No one has a solution.

Maybe you should read the manuals. What happened to your people with
NeXT experience?

>They told me Executor was really awesome. Runs twice as fast as a IIci. 
>Wrong. It does certain tasks twice as fast as a IIci. It does most things
>much slower than a IIci. It implements a limited subset of the MacOS. It does
>not run a majority of the Mac software we have. It does not support *any*
>of the additions Apple made with system 7. Not a single one.

If you already had a load of Mac software, weren't you already prejudiced
in favor of the Mac? Why would any intelligent NeXT user want to run Mac
software? I bought a NeXT to run NeXT software. 

>They talked about the wonders of Objects and how NeXT can add any feature to
>their OS and every application will merrily take advantage of it. But we
>found out that NS3.0 broke a lot of software. One implementation of X we saw
>won't run on a color station, but will run on a color turbo.

NS 3.0 didn't break software. The ADB keyboard broke software that didn't
follow NeXT programming guidelines. System 7.0 broke software. The Quadras
broke software. The software that was broken didn't follow Apple's
programming guidelines. About that X implementation, so what? Didn't you
discover any software that runs on Quadras but not Classics?

>They said software wouldn't be a problem. We have all kinds of problems running
>WordPerfect. And WordPerfect doesn't seem too excited about developing a new
>version. Improv is awful (buggy), and no fixes in site there.

WordPerfect is WordPerfect. Nothing more needs to be said.

>They said IB and Objective C and the NeXT app framework would all but write
>our applications for us. But then we saw Serius Developer, Component Workshop,
>AppMaker, Prograph, etc. NeXT *used to* have a big lead in software 
>development tools.

If you think Appmaker challenges IB and Objective C, you haven't used
both of them. Appmaker is a code generator :(.

>We bought a fax modem. After two hours of trying to get it to work on the NeXT
>we gave up. We hooked it up to a Mac, ran an installer, and it works
>beautifully. Is spending two hours hooking up a peripheral your definition
>of high productivity? 

You guys have real problems with trivial operations. Where's your
experienced NeXT user?

>Windows and Mac may not be the state of the art in computer technology. But
>both are widely used, accepted, and supported. There are hundreds of 
>wonderful business applications available. We can buy cheap LC's for people
>who don't really need a lot of power. Other users can choose VX's or the
>upcoming Centris. I personally use a Quadra 950. All of these machines mix
>and match beautifully. NeXT doesn't have this sort of flexibility and won't
>even if NS486 turns out to be more than the usual exaggerated NeXT claim.

NS 486 will add this flexibility. There are thousands of corporations
that have standardized on the 486. They get their machines from Dell or
Compaq or whoever. They don't like the single supplier philosophy. They
would buy Mac clones if they were available. They're not, so they'll
buy whatever software gives them an advantage. NeXTSTEP gives them an
advantage over DOS/Windows. They won't even consider the Mac.


Terry Wilcox
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy