Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!microsoft!edwardj From: edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: SOME ADVICE FOR NEXT Message-ID: <57835@microsoft.UUCP> Date: 30 Sep 90 22:15:51 GMT References: <340@atncpc.UUCP> Reply-To: edwardj@microsoft.UUCP (Edward JUNG) Distribution: comp Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA Lines: 45 IMHO the main reason to look at other CPUs is *not* principally speed, performance, or what have you. It is independence. Companies such as NeXT need to stay loose and mobile to remain competitive. NeXT has taken many steps toward this: 1. a modular, portable OS 2. a modular, portable development environment 3. standard networking But consider that currently NeXT is dependent upon a single vendor, ie Motorola, to deliver CPUs upon which their entire marketing strategy rests. A delay in delivery, which has happened more than once already, translates into a delay in shipment, loss of revenue, loss of mindshare, and loss of reputation in general. This is a dangerous exposure for a small, innovative company that needs to remain competitive in a timely manner. Much is made of NeXT's ability to design and deliver an entire new system in eight months, but this only happened because it was eight months that happened to mesh with Motorola's schedule. For other parts NeXT ostensibly could have gone with other architectures, but for CPU there was only one choice. Open CPU architectures such as SPARC and MIPS allow designers the freedom of looking toward many vendors of the CPU, more types of CPUs with varying performance and pricing, and even the flexibility of manufacturing the chip for themselves. There is less dependence upon a single company to service the needs of all clients of the architecture. You get to spread your bets, so to speak. NeXT could make this leap and have a new binary standard before it is too expensive to do so (one could argue, though, that at this point in their marketing strategy it would be fatal to switch). Witness MIPS, for example. They do not really produce chips themselves, but you can buy a variety of MIPS CPUs for all kinds of applications. A 64-bit MP-capable 50+ MIPS chip will be available along with various embedded versions (eg for a laser printer), high-speed ECL, and numerous high-speed FP units -- well-before the higher speed 68050 is available, for example. So IMHO the reason to move to a different CPU architecture has more to do with independence, freedom, and flexibility than any other reasons. -- Edward Jung Microsoft Corp. My opinions do not reflect any policy of my employer.