Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Path: utzoo!utgpu!judge From: judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Peter Judge) Subject: Next NeXT Message-ID: <1990Mar27.205146.2820@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> Organization: UTCS Public Access Date: Tue, 27 Mar 90 20:51:46 GMT Leaving the issues of software aside for the time being (I think thatUs where NeXT has been putting most of its energies, and rightly so!) I'd like to add my two bits worth concerning the hardware platform the next NeXT might offer. There is a lot NeXT could do to spruce up its MIPS rating without using this week's hottest RISC chip. Exploit the advantages of MACH! Raw Speed and Multiprocessing Like it or not (and I don't) MIPS is a major influence on workstation purchasers. IUm getting tired of explaining the benefits of a completely object-oriented development system, rich bundled software, and so on to skeptics who then dismiss the important issues with, "yeah but a SparcStation is faster". Besides, IBM's Series 6000 machines with NeXTStep are starting to look good if your application doesn't need sound (that doesn't include me!), and I think we're all hoping that NeXTStep on the IBM will be better for NeXT than for IBM, right? I'm sure that NeXT will soon go to the 68040 and that will settle the score -- for the next six months. Then everyone else will be on their next generation CPUs (RISC or CISC, I'm not religious). What to do? How about exploiting MACH's purported ability for close-coupled multiprocessing! Put a couple of 68040s on the motherboard, call it 40 MIPS, make it optional to put 4 such boards in the machine, call that 160 MIPS and then we can get back to the important issues of software development. Why do I have to read that Compaq (!) has multiprocessing extensions to its operating system when NeXT, which has the ideal basis for such a system, is still without one? Laboratory Control: The NeXT, with its removable erasable optical disk, DSP and ability to create virtual instruments is well positioned to replace a good deal of analog equipment in the laboratory. But, there are a few omissions which prevent it from taking its rightful place there. Realtime Incorporate genuine realtime capabilities. System V R4.0 has some, AIX R3.1 will have them. But where is the pre-emptive kernel, process locking, guaranteed interrupt response time and other features necessary to control realtime processes under MACH? Nubus Hardware The Nubus was a good choice for NeXT. ItUs bus-mastering features seem well suited for sophisticated hardware and multiprocessing. How about a fully featured laboratory control board with two DSP96001s, 64-bit intelligent opto-isolated I/O, multiple timers, 16-channel 16-bit fast A-D/D-A converters. There are a whole pile of scientific applications out there that are waiting for such a device. The add-on boxes presently available to enhance the NeXTUs I/O are too single-purpose to be very useful. I can't believe that NeXT doesn't have its bus-interface chip ready yet. Are hardware manufacturers holding off until the software takes off? Why? How difficult can it be to port the designs from a Macintosh Nubus board to the NeXT Nubus board. Some re-routing, lots more form factor and a bus interface chip should make it all straightforward. So where are the boards without which many scientific applications controlling the lab must languish? Other small suggestions DSPs I second other NetLand suggestions to incorporate the DSP 96001 in the next machine. This chip eases the programming burden so sharply that itUs worth its cost. It's 40 MFLOP rating takes your breath away too (is this rating legitimate?) A 'C' compiler would be another great addition. While weUre talking DSPs, and since we have Motorola's attention, why not put two on the motherboard and dedicate one to a Postscript Engine for monochrome and/or colour and the other to DSP? Speedy MODs The MODs are great. But when I'm trying to sell its virtues to prospective clients nobody wants to compare them with the 40-80 Meg tape drive they would otherwise be stuck with, they expect them to perform like a hard disk! It would be a major improvement if the MODs sported a transfer rate which supported realtime data acquisition, e.g., sound to disk, and (of course) if they were double sided. I would choose increased speed personally. Peter Judge (judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca) -- =============================================== judge@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Peter Judge) ===============================================