HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: isbell@cats.ucsc.edu (Art Isbell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac, Whats the difference?
Date: 25 Dec 92 20:03:11 GMT
Organization: Cubic Solutions - NeXT software development and consulting
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Dec25.143325.3711@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>
>	Unixware USER + Development :  $500 + $950.  < NeXtStep )$2200

I don't understand why you continue to present NeXT in the most negative light
you can.  You know (as we've discussed by email) that Unixware's User version
doesn't include such nice (and necessary to many) features like TCP/IP support
(i.e., no ethernet) and a couple of other optional packages that will be
standard with the user version of NS 486.  For those who need these packages,
the price for the Unixware user version is essentially identical with NS 486.
Of course, there are some users who might want the stripped down version of
Unixware for $500.

And NS 486's announced (but not confirmed to my knowledge) prices are
comparable to all Intel Unix packages that I've seen on a feature-by-feature
basis.  What some of these other packages offer are stripped down versions for
less money, but when you load them up with Motif development support, your at
the NS 486 developer version price range.

Of course, all Intel Unix vendors might need to adjust their prices if the see
Windows NT as a real competitor.
>
>	2.  The compatibility also hasn't been determined.  It probably
>	wont be as good as OS/2, which most people find "sufficient" or
>	"adequate"

Upon what do you base this?  Sounds like more of your NeXT negativism to me.
-- 

Art Isbell                                                      Cubic Solutions
NeXT Registered Developer #745         NeXT software development and consulting
NeXTmail: isbell@cats.UCSC.EDU                             Voice: (408)335-1154
USmail: 95018-9442                                           Fax: (408)335-2515
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: edwardj@microsoft.com (Edward Jung)
Subject: Convergent Technologies (WAS: End of NeXT)
Date: 01 Jan 93 05:02:28 GMT
Organization: Strategy Division, Microsoft Corp.

Chuck Waltrip writes:

>	needed (the networking and IPC).  Microsoft owes no apology for
>	that (though I'm not saying there mightn't be some things for
>	which an apology might be owed).  And NT introduces a new

Touche! And I'm certain somewhere down the line, I'll be one of
those apologetic guys! ;-)

>	But I believe that the object-orientation of NeXTSTEP (the
>	environment as opposed to the underlying operating system) is
>	a more elegant solution to computer science issues than the
>	Microsoft environment (though it remains to be seen if it will
>	be more elegant than Microsoft's Cairo object-oriented environ-
>	ment when/if it appears).

Well, that's MY job on the line. I am ultimately responsible for
Cairo's object system design. Hey, I wish I could have done this
work for the NeXT environment (it would ship alot earlier, that's
for certain), but alas that is not the way fate spun her web.

>       I also believe that NeXTSTEP could
>	be a better solution to user problems by providing complete
>	compatibility on a networking and IPC level while accommodating
>	both GUI's on a single application.  As I have suggested before,
>	there are two approaches:  port NeXTSTEP to NT; or provide the
>	application program interfaces for the Microsoft IPC and 	 
>	networking within NeXTSTEP along with drivers that can be accessed
>	by emulators such as SoftPC for the networking and IPC.

A NeXTstep port to NT was once upon a time a viable proposition.
Alas, that is not the way fate spun her web, and those who may
have supported such a (possibly heretical?) notion are gone from
NeXT (no, not Bud). Putting the MS APIs on NeXT is another good
possibility, but very risky for a resource-constrained company
like NeXT (remember this amazing fact: NeXT pulled off all their
miracles with a software group of under 60).

>	Until then, NeXTSTEP will cater primarily to
>	those with interests in computer science or developers who would
>	rather be happy than rich 8^} 

Great quotable quote. But it makes me feel like I sold out!

BTW, I think for Cairo we are solving many computer science
problems. Enough of them that I have been an invited speaker
to the researchers at places like Stanford, MIT and CMU to
talk about our endeavors. IMHO, the place where NeXT did the
greatest work was the tuning of the AppKit with Interface
Builder and the Sound and MusicKit support. These were quite
innovative (in ways that most developers don't even realize).
Things like DPS, Mach, ObjC, etc. were pre-existing and kind
of hacky techologies, again, IMHO. But what a great package!

--
Edward Jung, Software Architect     edwardj@microsoft.com
Advanced Systems, Microsoft Corp.
From: marcos@kaleida.com (Paul Marcos)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: End of NeXT
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:48:46 GMT
Followup-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Organization: Kaleida Labs, Inc.

In article <72148@cup.portal.com>, kent_stuart_smith@cup.portal.com wrote:
> 
> > Its much like Ford Motor Co. in the early part of the century.  I fear that
> NeXT will be be eventually bought by the Japanese.  They may be able to 
> eventually use NS in a successful fight with Microsoft in the future. I also 
> fear that Jobs won't be able to hold out forever- remember, he's lost a lot
>  of his fortune in NeXT, as well as his credibility in the computer world. It
>  took me back to see the cheap prices of NeXT machines offered by Spherical
> (even though they are used).  Watch out for the prices, though when NeXT is a
> wholly owned Japanese company...

Maybe I'm just missing your point.  First, what's to fear about NeXT being
owned by the Japanese?  Second, Canon already owns a good piece of NeXT.  I
don't recal the numbers but it wasn't a small percentage if my memory
serves me correctly.  I also don't get the insinuation that you're making
in the last statement.  Are you saying that you think prices would go up or
down if NeXT is to be owned by a Japanese company.  

I'm just trying to understand what you're saying because it isn't clear to
me.  

Thanks

Paul
.........................................................................
Paul Marcos                                                (415) 966-0873
Kaleida Labs, Inc.                                     marcos@kaleida.com
.........................................................................
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: vhs@rhein-main.de (Volker Herminghaus-Shirai)
Subject: Re: End of the Year (was Re: End of NeXT)
Reply-To: vhs@rhein-main.de
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 15:02:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan01.044049.29061@microsoft.com> edwardj@microsoft.com (Edward Jung)  
writes:
> I have to struggle to push innovation into products
> over the MS mantra of "only do what the customer asks"...

I was wondering why MS apps are so pointless and innovation-free.
Designed by lusers - Ack! So there is nobody at MS with enough vision
to really improv(tm) end-user productivity except maybe for the guys
working on the caleida project which is likely to be outdated when
and if it comes to market?
Just tell me one thing: Will caleida's GUI look like windoze 3?
MS can't alienate phantastillions of people that are used to it =}8*#

;-) (Only because Mr.Jung seems to be a relatively reasonable person.)

--
Volker Herminghaus-Shirai (vhs@qb.rhein-main.de)

Looks good on the outside, but -
	intel inside
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Subject: Re: DOOM!
Reply-To: jeffo@uiuc.edu (J.B. Nicholson-Owens)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 20:52:31 GMT

Terrance Wilcox writes
> As long as NeXT continues forward its mistakes can be minimized.

As long as NeXT continues to make mistakes and charge people for them, NeXT will continue to make mistakes.  For example, the  
 
NeXTdimension is a ripoff at it's current price and capability.  The people who paid for it before it came out should be able to get a partial refund because of NeXT not selling what was was initially advertised (bait and switch).
-- 
-- Jeff (jeffo@uiuc.edu)
-- NeXTmail welcome

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: NeXT vs Mac, Whats the difference?
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 21:25:20 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.142201.17973@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>1. NeXT has a great (possibly best around) development tools.
>
>
>	Has anyone got the low down on whether the release
>	shrinkwrap ~$900 version of NS486 will include these tools,
>	or will you have to buy the $2200 developer version?  
>
>	I hope it'll be in the release version.  At $900, it's sure
>	to have a hard time--at $2200 it's sureto be a failure.
>

That's a relief. Now we don't have to worry about Solaris or Univel's
UnixWare either. Neither one of those are shipping development tools
with their user version, and their prices aren't much different.

>
>>2. I will soon be able to run my NeXTstep apps on a PC system with NS486.
>
>
>	Believe it when you see it.  NS486, sure--but will NS486 run
>	DOS and win apps?  At this point, who knows?
>
>
Yes, NS486 will run DOS and Windows apps. Don't you keep up with the
news? Your opinion would be worth so much more if you were at all
informed.

Terry Wilcox

Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: chuck@nighthawk.jhuapl.edu (Chuck Waltrip)
Subject: Re: End of NeXT(It's only the beginning...)
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:46:21 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.100912.2524@microsoft.com> edwardj@microsoft.com  
(Edward Jung) writes:
> filibert@ohsu.edu writes:
> 
> >Unfortunately, the problems are generally all solved
> >before Microsoft gets to work on a solution.  If this isn't
> >the case, then could you possibly tell us one problem that
> >NT solves that isn't solved already by NeXTStep, or OS/2
> >for that matter?

	[...Jung's list of features in response is omitted...]

	I would add to Jung's list that NT solves the problem of
	providing an advanced operating system to host the Microsoft
	environment which includes specific tools for networking & inter-
	process communications IPC) as well as GUI.  NT perhaps does 
	nothing to solve computer science problems (which is what I
	believe the original poster meant) but it certainly addresses
	user and system administration problems in the installed base
	world.

	I do not claim that Microsoft's environment is the most elegant
	any more than Jung did.  It evolved and retained backwards
	compatibility while providing new features that were badly
	needed (the networking and IPC).  Microsoft owes no apology for
	that (though I'm not saying there mightn't be some things for
	which an apology might be owed).  And NT introduces a new
	super-environment with lots of very nice features which NeXTSTEP
	would do well to provide as well (see Jung's list).

	But I believe that the object-orientation of NeXTSTEP (the
	environment as opposed to the underlying operating system) is
	a more elegant solution to computer science issues than the
	Microsoft environment (though it remains to be seen if it will
	be more elegant than Microsoft's Cairo object-oriented environ-
	ment when/if it appears).  I also believe that NeXTSTEP could
	be a better solution to user problems by providing complete
	compatibility on a networking and IPC level while accommodating
	both GUI's on a single application.  As I have suggested before,
	there are two approaches:  port NeXTSTEP to NT; or provide the
	application program interfaces for the Microsoft IPC and 	 
	networking within NeXTSTEP along with drivers that can be accessed
	by emulators such as SoftPC for the networking and IPC.  If an
	application written for the Microsoft environment (using, for
	instance LAN Manager and DLL) can run as well on a NeXT platform
	and interact fully with NeXTSTEP applications which use the same
	interfaces, then NeXTSTEP will have addressed the same user 	 
	problems as NT.  Until then, NeXTSTEP will cater primarily to
	those with interests in computer science or developers who would
	rather be happy than rich 8^} 

cfwaltrip
Opinions expressed are my own.
email:	<chuck@nighthawk.jhuapl.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361)
Subject: Re: End of NeXT
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 18:37:05 GMT

In article <1992Dec25.144047.4289@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>In article <1992Dec24.211611.15877@cuug.ab.ca> wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 229-3361) writes:
>>Are you sure you mean vapor? There are developers out there with beta
>>copies. 
>
>	You can *buy* NT _right now_ for $69.  Call MS.
>

No, you can buy the NT SDK. NT is not shipping a release version yet.
It's still beta testing and won't be released for quite a while. There's
an email address you can contact if you want to beta test NS486. Just
because MS will sell you a copy of beta software doesn't mean it's shipping.

In any event, the term vapor is commonly applied to annoounced but
non-existant software. If you choose to use the term incorrectly, that's
your problem.

>
>>The only thing you can't do is go to the store and buy it. 
>
>
>	Oops.  Looks like NT is a little less vapor than NS486, then.
>

You mean NT is available in stores? Where?

>
>>I 
>>think you're just a bit confused.
>
>
>	I think you're a bit misinformed.
>
Not likely, read the next comment. This is so much fun.

>
>>I doubt that anybody could lecture on microkernals based on their knowledge
>>of NT. NT isn't a microkernal.
>
>
>	Microkernel does not necessarily mean Mach.  In any case, if
>	it's not microkernel, well, tell that to the guys at MS
>	who used to work on Mach for Carnegie Mellon.>

Dave Cutler (the guy in charge of NT) has said that NT isn't a microkernal.
The guys that worked on Mach at CMU aren't working on NT. I assume those guys
already know NT isn't a microkernal.

Instead of making misguided, inflammatory comments, why don't you read
the newsgroups involved. There's a lovely thread in comp.os.mach about
Mach VS. NT. It'll explain all about NT not being a microkernal.

The Hackers Dictionary has some good definitions (including vaporware).
I recommend you read it before misusing terms.

Merry Christmas.

Terry Wilcox
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: edwardj@microsoft.com (Edward Jung)
Subject: Re: End of NeXT(It's only the beginning...)
Date: 31 Dec 92 10:09:12 GMT
Organization: Strategy Division, Microsoft Corp.

filibert@ohsu.edu writes:

>Unfortunately, the problems are generally all solved
>before Microsoft gets to work on a solution.  If this isn't
>the case, then could you possibly tell us one problem that
>NT solves that isn't solved already by NeXTStep, or OS/2
>for that matter?

Well... it runs on a variety of multiprocessor systems with
a very nice r/t-friendly scheduler. It has a functional
object security system that's pretty decent. It implements
a modular kernal. It has a multithreaded window and graphics
system with full security and protection, i.e. many threads
can call GUI functions without explicit synchronization
and while maintaining security. And a desynchronized input
queue for user interface event processing. Protected,
secure, client-server dynamic link modules.

I expect these OS's are all about the same overall from
a technical standpoint. NT is not a super-standout, but
it is a reasonable foundation upon which subsequent technology
can be built. It is that work which is more interesting --
again, base OS services are not that interesting any more.


--
Edward Jung, Software Architect     edwardj@microsoft.com
Advanced Systems, Microsoft Corp.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: rbc!al (Al Davis)
Subject: Re: Insults (was: Re: standardizing NeXTSTEP)
Reply-To: davis@ee.rochester.edu
Organization: Huh?
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 06:35:38 GMT

mark.d.wuest writes
> >Remember who wrote TRS-DOS?

Randy Cook
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: End of the Year (was Re: End of NeXT)
Keywords: friendly sarcasm enclosed
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 18:17:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.141936.4222@hot.com> Robert_La_Ferla@hot.com writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.090355.25626@microsoft.com> edwardj@microsoft.com  
>(Edward Jung) writes:
>> [The holiday season gives me time to peruse these great advocacy
>>  discussions... entertainment for all!]
>
>Let the entertainment begin...
> 
>> A final point. Microsoft has traditionally focused on customer
>> needs.
>
>Edward,
>
>I've been meaning to ask someone at Microsoft what the term "Unrecoverable  
>Application Error" means.  Is it something I need?  I can't seem to find  
>it on NeXTSTEP.
>
>> NeXT, and Jobs, have focused on anticipating the needs
>> that customers don't have yet, but probably will.
>
>Customers don't have the need yet for an intuitive interface, previewing  
>of PostScript images, reading and writing DOS and Macintosh diskettes,  
>Microsoft Rich Text Format or any of the other rocket science features.


	All of these features you list need caveats (especially the
	Mac disk one)

>What customers really need is an operating system that requires the  
>constant use of "ALT-CTRL-DEL", QEMM, a LED display on their hardware  
>indicating the clock speed and a matching mouse mat.
>
>When it comes right down to it, NeXT users are needy.  Specifically, NeXT  
>needs to address these needs and ship Solitaire with every NeXTSTEP 486  
>system.
>
>Here's a question to ponder in the new year:
>
>What features of Windows 3.1 do NeXTSTEP users need?


	Applications, a good help system.

	<I'm sure there are others, but not many.  NS is, afterall, 
	probably the singlemost respected piece of SW in the industry>

	How about something DesqView/X has that NS, Windows, AND OS/2
	could use?  *Scalable* windows.  For instance, I hate having to 
	adjust the font size to make the font bigger or smaller on a terminal,
	since it's a fixed space font and the actual point size is
	irrelavent, why not just add a little click button and let the
	window resizing either adjust columns&rows or adjust font size to
	"best fit"?  This would be a *snap* for NeXT, becuase they're already
	doing DPS--might even try to implement it for *all* windows, and not
	just text only.. (but that would have other problems--i.e. you'd
	have to make it clear [different titlebar?] that a window is reduced
	so as not to confuse users).


>Robert
>
>P.S.  Rumor has it that Lotus uses the number of DOS/Windows 3.x reboots  
>per hour for limit testing their bar graphs.


-- 
	Blaming society for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.
	         ---  Boycott == censorship == cowardice  ---
	Do I even need to point out that my views do not represent
	those of my employer, institution or relations?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
From: lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (David Lemson)
Subject: Another NeXT sighting
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 01:33:01 GMT

While vacationing this past week, I saw a commercial on CNN
describing what they think are important tools to succeed in
business.  It started with things like Newsweek and of course ended
with CNN.  The only two computers that I could make out were a
PowerBook and a very close shot of a NeXT Color.
This was a commercial for CNN, maybe for their MoneyLine program,
I'm not sure.
There was Japanese writing on the screen, looked more like a TIFF
than the Kanji version of the OS...
-- 
David Lemson                                                (217) 244-1205
University of Illinois NeXT Campus Consultant / CCSO NeXT Lab System Admin
Internet : lemson@uiuc.edu                UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson 
NeXTMail & MIME accepted                           BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: RE: The Future of Next, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 07:20:10 -0500

TO: comp.sys.next.advocacy

   
STeve Johnson writes in a message to All on 27 Dec 92:

 SJ> The foreign manufacturing may or may not solve the money problems. 
 SJ> If quality control can be maintained, NeXT wouldn't lose on 
 SJ> the warranty. This would be a plus. On the other hand, the 
 SJ> 'buy American' theme may hurt US sales. Tough call. 
  
 SJ> Out on a limb for 1993: 1)NeXT sales will slump. Without new 
 SJ> hardware, NeXT could very well be crushed by Sun. 2)NextStep 
 SJ> 486 won't sell due to its high pricetag. I don't think Solaris 
 SJ> for 486 will fare too well, either. 

As many people, including myself, have been saying in posts here and on comp
sys.next.misc for over a year, NeXT could succeed only as a software company
with some limited production of higher end hardware in the manner of Sun.  But
it may be too late for that now, particularly in the light of the pricing of
NeXTstep 486.  At one-third the current price for NeXTstep 486, NeXT might
have a future, but it would be a gamble.

It is sad to see how NeXT has squandered its lead on the competition first by
defining itself as a hardware company and then by focussing on a niche market
for companies that need to write their own software ("mission critical...") --
unfortunately too small a niche to make sense.  At what rate is NeXT now
selling?  As much as 10,000 a year?  I remember a talk on Apple by Cary Lu in
1986 in which he said:  "IBM is a hardware company that thinks it's a great
software company and Apple is a great software companay that thinks it's a
great hardware company."

Another so;ution for NeXT would have been a merger with someone like Compaq or
even Sun.  But it is too late for that as well.  I think that the best thing
that could happen -- failing a last-ditch attempt by selling NeXTstep 486 at
$300 -- is a takeover by Canon and an agressive effort at the Japanese market.
 Otherwise no more NeXT.
From: filibert@vista (Daniel Filiberti)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: End of NeXT(It's only the beginning...)
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:53:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: ohsu.1992Dec30.175353.5453
Reply-To: filibert@ohsu.edu
Organization: Oregon Health Sciences University

In article <1992Dec30.090355.25626@microsoft.com> edwardj@microsoft.com (Edward  
Jung) writes:
> [The holiday season gives me time to peruse these great advocacy
>  discussions... entertainment for all!]
..stuff deleted

> A final point. Microsoft has traditionally focused on customer
> needs. NeXT, and Jobs, have focused on anticipating the needs
> that customers don't have yet, but probably will. As the
> industry has become more market driven due to competitive
> and pricing pressures, direct focus on customer needs has
> been very profitable since the purchaser tends to think in
> those terms (esp. for corporations).

Unfortunately, this makes Microsoft always one step
behind, doesn't it?  By the time they realize that their
customers need something, someone else has already
provided that service.  It seems to me that Microsoft has
been benefiting from the "I'm waiting for NT!" attitude
for a long time now.  One of these days, the new ideas will
move too fast for them and they will fall so far behind that
their users will lose patience, and purchase a NeXT ;).   

> After all, no company can solve all the problems; so we
> pick the ones we think we have a good chance at solving...

Unfortunately, the problems are generally all solved
before Microsoft gets to work on a solution.  If this isn't
the case, then could you possibly tell us one problem that
NT solves that isn't solved already by NeXTStep, or OS/2
for that matter?

> --
> Edward Jung, Software Architect     edwardj@microsoft.com
> Advanced Systems, Microsoft Corp.

Daniel Filiberti

---
************************************************************
Motto for a monitor, "It's better to burn out, than to fade
 away..."  [8?)}
************************************************************
 
Daniel Filiberti
Oregon Health Sciences University
Biomedical Information Communication Center (BICC)
3181 Sam Jackson Park Road
Portland, Oregon  97201-3098
email:  filibert@ohsu.edu