Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!dog.ee.lbl.gov!ux1.lbl.gov!skankman
From: skankman@ux1.lbl.gov (David Schurig)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: SPARCstation 2 --> workstation wars
Message-ID: <7669@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 19 Oct 90 16:36:04 GMT
References: <9010180146.AA09967@mcs-server.gac.edu> <28337@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Sender: usenet@dog.ee.lbl.gov
Reply-To: skankman@ux1.lbl.gov (David Schurig)
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley
Lines: 19
X-Local-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 90 09:36:04 PDT

In article <28337@boulder.Colorado.EDU> fozzard@alumni.colorado.edu (Richard Fozzard) writes:

>Now, now, let's be realistic. As anyone who works with both NeXTs and Macs
>knows, a "comparable machine" is not one with the same CPU, RAM, and HD.
>A 25Mhz '030 cube with a 300MB HD and 8MB RAM launches and runs apps only
>slightly faster than an 8Mhz '000 Mac SE (and far slower than a 16Mhz
>'020 Mac II), and 4MB RAM + 100MB HD on a Mac will hold
>as many simultaneously running apps and store as much as on the cube.

What the devil!!!!!!!!
Why is this the case? I have not used a NeXT yet, but I assumed from the
numbers that an 040 NeXT would blow away a IIfx ( at less than half the
cost. )  I was all set to buy a NeXTStation.  An 040 NeXT is going to be
slower than the IIci I am using now?  Is Unix such a burden for the blinding,
15MIPS 040, or is it that NeXT applications are so inefficient. What is the
deal?  I am going to require psychotherapy if the new NeXTs are comparable
to an SE.

Dav