Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!ziploc!stan From: stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: NeXT Review;Quite a machine, but not a Mac Summary: My personal comments after a year of NeXTs Message-ID: <404@toaster.SFSU.EDU> Date: 20 Mar 90 05:48:21 GMT Reply-To: stan@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Stan Osborne) Organization: San Francisco State University Lines: 393 12 March 1990 NeXT COMMENTS Stan Osborne These are my personal comments and recollections expanded from notes made during one of the NeXT demonstrations (11am) at Pacific Bell on 9 March 1990. Features mentioned during the demo were used to remind me of problems or limitations that I was aware of. These were writ- ten down as a reminder and have been converted here to more detailed commentary. The existence of these problems and limitations should not overshadow the great advance in desktop computing that NeXT is bringing to the market place. As NeXT likes to point out, they are raising the common denominator to a new level. Competi- tors of NeXT systems are now put in the position of having to compete by enhancing a lower base product. We all know good things take time to develop, especially good software. In another 12 months many of the limitations and problems mentioned here are likely to disappear. Hopefully NeXT won't introduce to many new ones, either. BACKGROUND The event was hosted by David St. Pierre, Pacific Bell. The introduction was done by Richard L. Miller, District Sales Manager, NeXT. The demo was done by Michael A. Fried, Systems Engineer, NeXT. The demo was a much smoother, better organ- ized, and prepared version of the demo given to faculty at SFSU over 1 year ago. In addition to working as a consultant to a Pacific Bell software development group, I'm employeed part-time by the SFSU CS Department. My familiarity with NeXT equipment started over one year ago when the Computer Science Department at SFSU received its first NeXT system. The first system the CS Dept. purchased was a "developer" configuration. The software on this system has made the progression from software release .8 to .9, and from .9 to the current 1.0 release. We are quite happy with the equipment and the software and recom- mend the system to others when the circumstances warrant. The SFSU CS Dept now has four NeXTs, 2 in labs and 2 in faculty offices. SYSTEM FEATURES o No file or compute servers NeXT does not have a solution that allows the building of a powerful compute or large i/o server from any of their systems. It is possible to attach additional devices to solve some of the i/o limitations. NeXT will sell 20 workstations that work together but does not have a server to act as a central resource for these workstations. Environments that require servers must use and support multiple equipment manufacturers. o Sound Support not provided in other NeXTStep environments Many of the NeXTStep based applications demonstrated today will not run on the base configurations for the newly announced IBM workstations. The base IBM systems do not have support for sound. o Limited Fonts in base system Very few fonts are provided even when a Laser printer is purchased. People who have used the Macintosh or other Adobe PostScript printers are quite disappointed by the lack of fonts in the base system. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better than a Mac for desktop publishing when the base system is typographically incomplete. o Limited Additional Fonts Recently a few more fonts became available from Adobe, but these must be licensed for each workstation. There is still no way to get the choice of fonts possible for a Mac. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better than a Mac for desktop publishing when so little choice is provided. Adobe took so long to release the few addi- tional fonts now available and charges so much money for them, Macs are still much better for desktop publishing. Since Adobe has been involved with NeXT development from the beginning, one wonders why it takes them so long to provide so little support to the customers of a company that has generated a lot of positive publicity. Is it possible that Adobe is not taking NeXT seriously? o European Language Accent Marks The published documentation was supposedly made with software tools on the NeXT (WriteNow). There are sec- tions in French and elsewhere there is documentation on how to make the accented european characters. The release notes clearly state that the documented com- posite key strokes to make accented characters do not work. It is a bit misleading to say the documentation is an example and then to also say it is impossible for oth- ers to duplicate the examples. o Big email messages are not compatible with other systems The NeXT email support for pictures, documents, and sound often makes the email messages gigantic. Most email sup- port programs on other Unix systems have a limit on the size of a message. This usually causes NeXT email routed through other Unix systems to be truncated or lost because they are too big. What good is support for fancy email if you can't send it to someone? o SLIP is not easily available Serial Line Internet Protocol is not provided nor is there any information in the documentation on how one obtains this software. People with NeXTs at home are not able to establish a state-of-the-art network link with computers at work without this software. This common Unix software is used by NeXT to test the performance of their serial ports. Why is it so hard for customers who need this software to find out about it or to obtain it? SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT o Current versions of some AT&T C code does not easily port An attempt was made to port to the NeXT the current ver- sions of some C programs developed and licensed by AT&T. The NeXT C compiler and other Unix tools would not work to build these programs. It was determined that exten- sive modification of source code would be necessary before they could be built successfully. These same pro- grams build without modification on Sun Workstations, Intel/Xenix, and other Unix systems based on BSD 4.3 and System V R3. From this it is clear that NeXT's claim of "Unix Compati- bility" is marketing rhetoric. o Interface Builder requires time to master Like any good software tool, Interface Builder can be used in complex ways. Not everyone will be able to learn the intricacies of Interface Builder or be able to use them correctly and effectively. Building applications with this tool does save a lot of time. It is possible for beginners to build impressive user interfaces. Yet, like all good tools, time and talent are still needed before someone can honestly say they have become a master of the tool. o Interface Builder has no built in support for automated testing Interface Builder should have built in support for the logging and playback of all users input/output events. This functionality is required for automating the testing of the application. Many organization have learned the importance of using automated testing to sustain high quality applications. A few are beginning to require this functionality in their procurement specifications (e.g. Pacific Bell, US Government agencies) NeXT has done a wonderful job of reducing the effort (and cost) required to develop a sophisticated user interface. But this is extreamly missleading when the costs of the complete lifecycle of an application are analyzed. It is generally accepted that the initial coding phase is less than 20% of the total costs involved in building an application. The ease of building a user interface allows more effort in this phase to be spent on creating a higer quality application. It is also generally accepted that 50% or more of the costs are spent in testing and rework. Thus any built in support for automated testing will have, in the long run, a significant impact on the long term quality of the application. To automate testing is trivial when the application uses simple interaction with a terminal. The Unix pipe mechan- ism allows this I/O to be passed through special filters that capture the needed information. The use of a sophisticated graphical user interface (GUI) requires support for testing be built into the GUI. If the manufacturer does not build this into the GUI, it is often nearly impossible for an end user to get around this limitation. When a new product, such as Interface Builder, is first designed, it is usually quite easy to built in support for creating an complete input/output transaction logging mechanism. One only hopes that it is not to late for this vital feature to be added as an improvement to Interface Builder. o Mach OS threads don't work with the supplied "C" library The C library supplied by NeXT is not re-entrant. This makes it difficult for an application designer to take advantage of this important Mach feature. NeXT APPLICATIONS o WriteNow is a good demonstration program People used to the Macintosh are quite disappointed by the lack of functionality found in the default document preparation tool. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better than a Mac for documentation when less than the commonly understood and expected functionality is provided. o Mail Interface is a good demonstration program When an individual receives a lot of electronic mail, the NeXTStep email interface gets in the way. This is not surprising when even the "Mailtool" provided by Sun Microsystems for their workstations is only slightly better. The ability to send pictures, documents, and sound is wonderful and makes a good sales demonstration. I receive lots of email yet 99% of this mail comes from non-NeXT systems. What is NeXT doing to make it easier for me to read and manage this correspondence? It is my opinion that a lot can be done to make reading and manag- ing the current volume of email an easier task. NeXT should be taking a strong pro-active position with the tools that are used heavily by everyone. Mail is a good place to start. (The lack of a better user inter- face to email is a personal peeve of mine. I don't think this is the place for me to elaborate further.) o No "Rollodex" application Why must I get out my little black book to find the address, telephone number, birthday, email address, etc. for any of the people with whom I correspond? In an object oriented environment a card filing system should also be interfaced with email and document preparation objects. o No "Hypercard" like application Support for multi media was plugged during the demonstra- tion. Hypermedia and/or Hypertext are current hot areas that are leading to understandable and easier to learn applications. Hypercard is available for every Mac. What does NeXT have to offer?. It is misleading to imply that the NeXT system is better than a Mac for non-programmers when less than the commonly understood and expected functionality is provided. o Mathematica needs resources It is unrealistic to imply that Mathematica works with all system configurations. It is quite easy for simple mathematical problems to quickly consume 100 Meg of page- file space. This means the 8 Meg Ram and 40 Meg hard disk provided with a base NeXT configuration will not support Mathematica beginners. With the base system configura- tion, Mathematica is, at best, a reason for purchasing hardware upgrades at a later date. 3RD PARTY APPLICATIONS o Frame is not suitable for building real books or docu- ments People who write sophisticated books and technical docu- ments rely on bibliographic citations. Support for bibliographies is a requirement not satisfied by Frame. Thus Frame is not suitable for building books that are for technical or academic readers. At one point the demonstration relied on Frame's ability to easily construct books. I know a professor who asked specifically if Frame supported bibliographies. Both the NeXT and Frame sales people enthusiastically said yes. A copy of Frame was purchased based on their insistence that Frame could make books. Now this professor is going around saying that NeXT and Frame sales people told lies, and that even they were fooled by their company's market- ing rhetoric. Similar enthusiasm and misrepresentation also occurred with another 3rd Party company and product. Both NeXT and its 3rd Party suppliers need to be careful they don't get sued for making false claims. o Still no spread sheet applications If my memory serves me right, it was spread sheets that made PCs take off in the business market place. NeXT now claims to be aggressively pursuing the business market. How can NeXT be taken seriously by the business community when no spread sheet application was available when NeXT said they were entering the business market? How can NeXT be taken seriously by the business community now that months have gone by and still no spread sheet appli- cation is available? o Many are 1st (beta test) versions Most of the few 3rd party products available for the NeXT are still in the first versions ever shipped to custo- mers. Quite often functionality was left out in the rush to ship the product. This means most of the 3rd party products are really just in their first or second round of beta testing. o Many not yet available NeXT documents that many companies are developing 3rd party products. Many of these products have yet to see the light of day. There may be copies for selective individuals to evaluate, but people who purchased systems to use with the touted 3rd party products are still wait- ing to find out the price or when the first version will ship. COSTS o List prices of 3rd party products are high compared with Macintosh People new to the Unix Workstation market are not expect- ing the prices asked for 3rd party software. (A one time Frame was asking $2600 for the NeXT product.) o The base price per workstation is high When many workstations are needed for work group unifor- mity the cost per workstation is an important considera- tion. Other workstation vendors are able to offer a base workstation with a substantially lower (50% less) unit price. When most of the software bundled with a NeXT system is not needed a NeXT workstation is not a cost effective solution. If the new X-Terminals on the market are considered low end workstations, the price differ- ences are even more pronounced. -- Stan Osborne, Computer Science Department, San Francisco State University Internet: stan@cs.sfsu.edu Usenet: cshub!stan Voice: (415) 338-2168