Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!usc!apple!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!knrgroup
From: knrgroup@garnet.berkeley.edu (Raymond group)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!!
Message-ID: <1990Nov6.002309.25393@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 6 Nov 90 00:23:09 GMT
References: <1990Nov5.191518.1095@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Nov5.200703.5387@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Nov5.215814.3435@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 84

I write:
>>Geez, by your argument, the Mac IIfx is a complete failure because it 
>>doesn't sell in the same numbers as a Mac Plus or a PC AT!

(keith matthew cardoza) writes:
>"Geez" I know this.  My point is that it's not a general business machine.
>That's what I said in both my posts.

Re-read your last post.  In it you compared the 22,000 NeXTs sold to the
hundred thousands of PCs sold.  This is a ridiculous comparison, as I 
pointed out.  As for the NeXT being a general business machine; this is
precisely what the NeXT is best suited for.  Companies like First Boston,
The William Morris Talent Agency, et al, have made bulk purchases of NeXT
machines.  Why?  Because of the great software development environment:
most large companies develop their own custom software.  Also because of
the power and ease-of-use of the computer.  As with a Mac, you don't have
to be an expert to use a NeXT.  I believe the NeXT has a better chance of
succeeding as a business machine than the Mac II.  Can you say, "There ain't
no Mac file server"?

(keith matthew cardoza) writes:
> OK.  I bow to you, interface king.

I'm a benevolent monarch.  Go use your lesser Mac GUI in peace.


I wrote:
>>Gosh, you'd also take IBM's word that the Mac is an inferior machine.

keith replies:
>Nope.

Good.  It also makes no sense to take Microsoft's or Symantec's word on the
NeXT, you'll have to agree.

keith writes:
>WP is not feature-laden.  

Whoa.  That's not the opinion of another poster on the same subject.  As for
me, I'm familiar with the NeXT version of WP.  And it IS feature-laden.
Moreoever, my point was that a combination of lack of speed and length of
development time crippled the Mac products of Lotus, Ashton-Tate, and
WordPerfect.  Don't you basically agree?  

I wrote:
>>Your original point was that Steve Jobs was not an innovator.

keith responds:
>Thanks for filling me in on what I was thinking.  My original point was that
>Jobs was a brilliant innovator who could not successfully bring his product
>to market.

I was only filling you in on what you actually wrote.  Your arguments shift
ground constantly.  You originally argued people should not believe that
Jobs was the great innovator at Apple because Jobs was actually driving the
company into the ground.  It was a non-sequitur that I tried to take at
face value.

I wrote:
>>...if there is any justice, these men (businessmen) will hire computer
>>people to make their computer-purchase decisions for them.

keith replies:
>My experience with MIS people tells me otherwise.

I think the NeXT will have more appeal to MIS people than the Mac II.  
NeXTStep, after all, already runs on IBM machines....

keith writes:
>if you feel compelled to reply, do it to e-mail, and save the others the
>boredom. 8^)

These Mac vs. NeXT vs. Amiga posts are probably some of the most interesting
stuff around.  They certainly do arouse passions.  And if someone gets bored,
there's always the good ole kill file.

In keith's signature:
>The University of Chicago : "We're smart, you're dumb." 8^)

I'm a Chicago graduate.  Guess that makes me as smart as you :-).  

>Macintosh (tm) - Once you go Mac, you never go back.

Absolutely correct.  You only go forward to a machine like the NeXT.