From: Alex Raftis
Subject: Re: New idea: forget Open Systems. N(o)T! (was Re: Open...)
Reply-To: alex@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu
Organization: Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 17:32:30 GMT


Note, that when I answer this, my answers come from a friend running a
Beta (maybe alpha) version of NT at work.

Jeff Bone writes
> 
> Here's the #1 REASON this whole argument is just plain *SILLY*:
> 
> 
> waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes:
> > NT is much more than DOS.
>      ^^
> and then:
> 
> > Windows NT apps will be network-capable
>                   ^^^^ ^^
> 
> Now, I recall that OS/2 was supposed to be this, and supposed to be that,
> and supposed to be some other, etc.  To date there are, what, a half-dozen
> OS/2 apps shipping? ;)  OS/2 was the technical brainchild of MS and IBM;
> what makes *ANYONE* think NT is going to be any more real?  

It definitely is. It is not however, very good at being multi-user. It's kind
of like Windows in that many apps can run at once, but only one user can use
the machine.

> YOU CAN'T BUY AN NT APP TODAY, AT ALL!  The whole argument is based on
> this implicit assumption that NT is going to, essentially, saturate the
> market!  I can't imagine that it won't, *however* I wouldn't invest a
> wooden nickel on the damn thing until it starts shipping to *end users*
> and until NT-aware apps start shipping.  AND STILL, if at that point it
> becomes obvious that NT-compatibility is desired...

No, but Microsoft is releaseing the first preliminaries, and from what I've
been able to gather, they are pretty solid. I was curious on this point after
some of Microsofts less reliable releases. From the impresssions of my 
friend, it sounds like NT will be ready to ship at about the same time as
NS486, but releases never seem to be reliable.

Don't forget, also, that Microsoft will be able to ship NT to all current
Windows users because NT will be able to run Windows applications. Another
point is that where my friend works they installed NT on a 386/20 and he
said that it runs responsively. This is more than can be said for NS486
which is requiring a minimum of a 486/25 (or preferably higher).

This all comes down to the fact that NT will have a buffer zone to get 
itself into the market place, unlike NeXTstep that basically had start
from scratch with new applicaions accross the board. NeXT will also have
to start from scratch on the 486 market place because they are completely
new to most MS-DOS users, many of whom don't even know who NeXT is, and with
scandal magazines like Byte forming their opinions, NeXT is going to have
a hard time.

> ....it'd still be better/easier/cheaper to build NT-compatibility on
> top of, say, the Mach 3.0 microkernel than attempt to port NeXTStep
> to a black-box OS that NeXT doesn't/almost certainly won't have a
> source license for!  Bottom line!   

For those who are not aware, NT is apparantly built upon a Mach kernal. The
main reason why it's not "UNIX" is that it doesn't have all the UNIX wrap-
pers that NeXT added to their Mach kernal. Ie, you don't really have a 
command line interface, just the windows.

> A *MUCH* better solution overall for NeXT would be to simply market the
> hell out of NeXTStep 486, go head to head -w- NT, and do *nothing* what-
> soever to validate NT as a technology.  Why in the world would NeXT, a
> self-admitted software technology company whose primary product is an
> OS/end-user environment want to help Billy sell his "New Toy"?
> 
> 
> >	But I'd rather concede the OS for now
> >	while keeping the user and development environment.
> >	OS with NT compatibility can come later from NeXT, OSF, USL or left
> >	field.
> 
> This won't happen.  NT gets entrenched, Microsoft pulls its third-party
> software developers strings, and NeXT jerks and jumps.  There's no good
> reason to concede the OS for now...  why do it?
 
I'd much rather see NeXTstep succede than NT, and NeXTstep has one major
advantage still, it's easier to develope applications. Also, NT is not
objet oriented, and that's becomming an important industry buzzword, so
Microsoft will have to address this issue, but it seems that they are 
preparing to release a solid product and soon. Microsoft is posed to 
slaughter NeXTstep if NeXT does not keep on it's toes and push back when
then get pushed by Microsoft. If they do indeed have the better product, 
they're going to have to prove it or loose.
 
> --
> -- Jeff Bone ------------------------------------------------------------
>       "Imagination is more important than knowledge."  - A. Einstein
> ------------------------------------------------------- jbone@dell.com --
>                                                                        --

Alex
--
______________________________________________________
    Internet: alex@data.acs.calpoly.edu (NeXT mail)
              alex@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.advocacy