Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cbmvax!daveh
From: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Commodore at FCC
Message-ID: <14649@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 25 Sep 90 20:50:36 GMT
References: <22107@grebyn.com> <14568@cbmvax.commodore.com> <22153@grebyn.com> <14621@cbmvax.commodore.com> <90268.122650UH2@psuvm.psu.edu>
Reply-To: daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave Haynie)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 43

In article <90268.122650UH2@psuvm.psu.edu> UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer) writes:
>In article <14621@cbmvax.commodore.com>, daveh@cbmvax.commodore.com (Dave
>Haynie) says:

>Lastly, why am I telling you this in an Amiga newsgroup.  Just because I'd
>like to see Commodore position the Amiga as a baby NeXT.  

I like some of what I see NeXT doing, especially with their software.  But
the basic NeXT cube wasn't anything much different than an A3000 in terms of
what the basic hardware is capable of.  NeXT may have a lead on 68040 
machines, but I doubt you'll find a 68040 NeXT performing faster than some
future 68040 Amiga.  Or an A3000 with 68040 board that any 3rd party can
build, for that matter.  I suppose we'll have to wait to see what happens when
these kind of things ship.  I don't see the "baby" relationship as being
valid, either taking the Amiga vs. NeXT on cost or performance.  In fact, it'll
be a bit harder to see performance differences between 68040 machines than
it was with 68030 machines.  And in the 68030 machine race, the A3000 and the
Cube are pretty even.  For fast 68030 machine, talk to HP/Apollo.

>This might include porting ObjC and the Interface Builder, and so forth.  

With 2.0's Intuition objects, I would imagine something like Interface 
Builder would be possible.  From what I've read on Object C, it's pretty ugly
as compared to something like C++.  It's main advantage is that, like
SmallTalk, it supports runtime object linking, whereas everything in C++
(at least the versions I've used to date) is linked at compile time, though
you can still have runtime binding within a program.

Though I think the main reason NeXT received as much attention as it did,
other than due to the basic "Star factor" of Steven Jobs, is that the software
has some pretty clever ideas.  Everyone knows that software takes too long
to write; hardware is advancing much faster than software, and the differences
are growing each year.  Things like Interface Builder seem to be one reasonable
way to help solve some of this, at least in the context of the GUI elements
added to a basic program.

>                                                                      lee


-- 
Dave Haynie Commodore-Amiga (Amiga 3000) "The Crew That Never Rests"
   {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!daveh      PLINK: hazy     BIX: hazy
	Standing on the shoulders of giants leaves me cold	-REM