From: zmonster@athena.mit.edu (Eric M Hermanson)
Subject: Re: Mac multitasking?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 07:44:48 GMT

In article <7_g2zs#@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec325.its.rpi.edu.its1 writes:
>>
>>With the Next, all color information is handled by the color panel (object).
>>When NeXT upgraded the color panel to include PANTONE color support, ALL
>>applications that had a color panel (or variation thereof) in them 
>>automatically took advantage of this change.  Since the objects (in this
>>case color panel) are bound (read in) at the run time of the program, the
>>new color panel object popped up when the user selected "Color.." from 
>>the menu.  This new color panel allowed the users to select colors through
>>the PANTONE color matching system.  This is another advantage of NeXT.  It
>>has PANTONE color support BUILT into the operating system.  ANY program
>>may take advantage of it.  On the Mac, only programs that are WRITTEN to 
>>have PANTONE color picking have it.  Object oriented technology makes
>>programs very modular.  In this way, if a "module" is upgraded, ALL 
>>applications benefit.  It is INHERENT in the operating system. 
>
>It is inherint in ANY OS that provides services like that; and MacOS
>is one such. To do the same thing you replace or patch the Color Picker
>Package.
>
>And it isn't even object oriented. :) This particular benefit is not
>really very unique.
>

I may be wrong about this, but here it goes anyways.  The Mac Color picker
is a Package, as you wrote.  It is a SEPARATE program from the existing program
you are running in.  WIth NeXT, the color panel is an object INSIDE of the
existing program.  This is better than the Mac setup, because with NeXT, a
programmer can write extensions to the NeXT color panel to modify it in
any way they choose.  The Mac Color picker is a separate program that 
Apple alone upgrades.  A person is stuck with the same old color picker on the
Mac until Apple decides to release another OS version.  WIth NeXT, programs
can contain variations of standard objects (i.e. color panel).  This is only
ONE of the many many advantages of NeXT.

The thing I like better about NeXT is display postcript.  Postcript is sent
directly to the screen, no proprietary imaging model is used, as with the
Mac, which only EMULATES postcript using QuickDraw.  A concrete example
of Display postcript's powers would be to try this test:

Draw a cirle on your Mac screen.  Then draw a tangent to that circle, as best
you can, without zooming in.  Do the same thing on a NeXT (built in display 
postcript).  You will find that the tangent is correct when printet out on
the NeXT 100% of the time.  On the Mac, the tangent is off.


>(b) The NeXT was not designed so from teh ground up, as one of its major
>    components (Mach) was just not designed for the NeXT; NeXT built
>    on a pre-existing foundation. However well they did it it, your
>    assertion isn't right. Interestingly, the MacOS ->was<- designed
>    from the ground up. (solidly is annother thing); does this help

Wrong.
Carnegie Mellon University developed Mach with the aid of NeXT.  Carnegie
Mellon now owns around 5% of NeXT computer.


Eric
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy