Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!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: <1990Nov7.215702.12788@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 7 Nov 90 21:57:02 GMT
References: <1990Nov7.015140.239@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Nov7.015951.784@agate.berkeley.edu> <46372@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 53

khcg0492@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kenneth Holden Chang) writes:
>Okay, there are two questions when asking about software:
>1)Is it available?
>2)How good is it?

>So far, Next users can only say, look in the catalog, it's available.  They
>can't tell you how well it's implemented, the bugs, the features that it has
>or doesn't have, or how well it compares with competing programs (as there
>are not competing programs), because they haven't seen most of them yet.

First question:  Is NeXT software available?  Yes it is available.  And there's
already fair coverage of the major areas:  word processing, database,
communications, spreadsheet, et al.  There are 3 word processors/desktop
publishing products already in "shrink wrap."  There are two relational
databases already running on the NeXT (Compare this to zero true relational
databases for the Mac).  There are two spreadsheets, Informix Wingz and a
Unix spreadsheet, already being used.  Two others, PowerStep and Improv are
in development.  

Second question:  How good is the stuff?  True, some areas have only one or
two software packages that cover them.  However, if the standard of comparison
is the Mac, Sun, or the PC, it is already abundantly clear that NeXT
software is better (easier-to-use and more powerful) than the software for
those machines. There may be 1,000 Mac programs that can do word processing.
However, if the several NeXT programs can do the job better or as well as the
best of the Mac programs, why choose the Mac?

I wrote:
>>As I've argued before, the NeXT is as easy to use or easier if you are doing
>>things you would do on a Mac.  However, if you want to take advantage of a
>>NeXT's extra power or expandability, you'll want to to learn some Unix.  The
>>average user, however, will never have to say the "U" word.

gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (JD144) writes:
>But on a Mac, I don't have to learn some of anything.  I just do.

But you cannot do it.  My point was that the NeXT lets you do things that you
just can't do with a Mac, no matter what your level of expertise with a Mac.
I outlined what some of those things were in previous postings.  I would
much rather learn a little Unix to do the special stuff than not be able to
do the special stuff at all with the Mac.

>You'd be surprised how many people can post to usenet, but still try and
>use the mouse like a remote control :).

Not too surprised...I read a posting from a guy who said that the only thing
that saved the Mac was the addition of arrow keys... :-(.
The nice thing about the NeXT that you can have the best of either or both 
worlds.  You can use Unix with a command-line interface if you want.  Or you
can totally ignore Unix and do everything from NeXTStep.  

gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (JD144) writes:
>