Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!unixhub!shelby!agate!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!cca.ucsf.edu!wet!capslock
From: capslock@wet.UUCP (Allen Crider)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: NeXT vs. Mac flame wars
Message-ID: <1722@wet.UUCP>
Date: 24 Oct 90 02:07:03 GMT
References: <87ocR1w163w@questor.wimsey.bc.ca>
Reply-To: capslock@wet.UUCP (Allen Crider)
Organization: Wetware Diversions, San Francisco
Lines: 23

In article <87ocR1w163w@questor.wimsey.bc.ca> aberno@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Anthony Berno) writes:
>There has been a lot of talk about the relative performance of the Mac
>vs. the NeXT. I quite agree, having used both, it would seem on the 
>surface that a high end MacII is faster. But consider this:
>
>...Several improvements of NeXT over Mac.

Reminds me of the flame wars of Mac vs. MS/DOS computers. Time marches on
and one thing about consumer computers is that they remain on the market
much past their prime. Sure, a comparible(cpu speed) Mac is faster than a NeXT.
But a similiar MS/DOS machine will be all over the Mac in CPU benchmarks.
New hardware and software designs arrive and sometimes the old boys try
to upgrade their products to include these new ideas. Note Windows 3.0 and
even OS/2 for the Intel PC world. Apple has been touting their system 7 for
longer than I care to remember.
 But they really aren't as good as a fresh start--a new computer designed 
from the start to take advantage of advances in CPUs, busses, software, etc.
 Someday, maybe the NeXT will be an overbundoned kludge like the Mac and
MS/DOS PCs are today, but for now, it is at least 5 years ahead of these
machines.

Allen Crider
Collier Systems