Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!lll-winken!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!bionet!arisia!roo!zany.EuroPARC.Xerox.COM!lovstran From: Lovstrand@EuroPARC.Xerox.COM (Lennart Lovstrand) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: SPARCstation 2 --> workstation wars Message-ID: <579@roo.UUCP> Date: 19 Oct 90 19:07:00 GMT References: <9010180146.AA09967@mcs-server.gac.edu> <2090@island.uu.net> Sender: news@parc.xerox.com Organization: Rank Xerox EuroPARC, Cambridge, UK Lines: 59 In article <2090@island.uu.net>, chris@island.uu.net (Chris King) writes: > In article <9010180146.AA09967@mcs-server.gac.edu> scott@nic.gac.edu writes: [...] > > This is why I'd like to see a less hardware-dependant NextStep. NeXT could > > move from hardware/software to more of a dependance on software - which is > > where the money is. NeXT could really clean up if they were running > > NeXTStep on Suns and {Dec,VAX}Stations, IMHO. > [ stuff about porting NeXTStep deleted ] > > > > I think NeXT should do this. We are already seeing that NeXT is being > > forced to run a thin line between the PC world and the Workstation > > world. Why not, instead, concentrate on blurring the distinctions > > by porting NextStep to high-end PCs and all workstations? Besides, > > that'd give me a greater market . . . :-) > > I disagree with this statement quite strongly. I think that engineers > like the idea of mix and match software and hardware, however the > general public does not. Alas, there are Customers out there (with a Capital C) that are either bound by company policy or simply too conservative to buy computers of any other brand than the "company approved" one. Sun has already become a bestseller at most universities that I know and they sure aren't going to junk their investment just because there is a snazzier box on the market. However, these guys usually *don't* feel any strong obligations to buy any particular software, so a portable NeXTStep environment would seem to me to potentially be a very big product. I mean, just look at the level of the competition! "X.11" as a *user* interface environment? What a joke! [This isn't even funny.] > One very important lesson that I think that > the success of the Macintosh should have taught the computer industry > is that the mainstream of computer buyers don't want to buy a chunk of > hardware and a bunch of miscellaneous software. They want to buy a > appliance. Early Mac buyers just wanted a word processing appliance. > They didn't give a damn what hardware it ran on. But they wanted to go > to the store, bring it home (or into their office), have it set up in > a hour or two and have it doing useful stuff for them in less than a > day. Exaclty the same way you would expect a buyer to treat a > microwave, a VCR or a answering machine. I couldn't agree less with your general sentiment! I don't know about NeXTs specificially, but in my experience, installing your generic UNIX box usually requires an MSc in Computer Science to get everything right. This includes everything from acquiring and setting up an IP subnet to loading up a DNS server, getting the latest version of sendmail, ftpd, etc from the Net and installing them, etc, etc. This is just ridiculous in comparison to the Mac (and Xerox XNS) world. On the other hand, if you compare with the HiFi market you can easily find customers for complete "systems" as well as separate units (tuner, CD player, amplifier, etc). I don't think the ability to mix-n-match should be ruled out to quickly. -- --Lennart R _A _ N_ K Rank Xerox EuroPARC, 61 Regent St, Cambridge, UK \/ |_ |_) | | \/ Zany, Sun-4/60 at EuroPARC, SunOS Release 4(0.3c)-3 /\ |_ | \ |_| /\ TOPS-20 Command processor 7(86)-4 [alpha] E u r o P A R C