Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!hp4nl!tuegate.tue.nl!rc6.urc.tue.nl!rwa.urc.tue.nl!rcbaem From: rcbaem@rwa.urc.tue.nl (pooh 'Ernst' Mulder) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!! Message-ID: Date: 8 Nov 90 22:22:55 GMT References: <1990Nov7.015140.239@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Nov8.203230.18538@cbnewsl.att.com> Sender: News Administration Reply-To: rcbaem@urc.tue.nl Lines: 68 well well well, at last I decided to add my 0.02 worth... When I bought my Mac (which was a very logical step for me, for I was an Apple ][ user...) some years ago the only programs available were MacPaint, MacDraw, MacWrite and an early version of Word.. This wasn't much, but when I saw a Mac for the first time in my life, back in 1984, I was impressed and fell in love with it. This was the user interface I'd always dreamed of. Since then the Mac grew common and lots of programs became available. Still, considering, I only use a very small number of programs. How is this with other people?? Mostly a programming environment, a word processor, a game every now and then, a small draw program (who needs MacDraw II and other such beasts anyway?)... Later I got to know Unix, and use it a lot. My roommate has a Unix box (Archimedes) for himself, and at our University there're many Unix workstations. I found that, however nice and beautiful the Mac is, programming is made for Unix, and vice versa. When programming any application I use this Archimedes. The power of Unix is in its utilities. Common things like tar, sed, awk, grep, make, vi make working with it a sheer delight. I prefer vi above any Mac text-editor you can mention. Not because it's easy to learn, but because it's much more flexible and faster once you got to know it. Gnu Emacs as a platform beats any Mac programming environment I know... When I compare a Unix box with the Mac I conclude ) For writing essays, creating documents, drawings etc.. the Mac is much easier and intuitive than any Unix (X) application I've seen. Therefore I can't see the use of a Unix box with any windowing system when the user can't get access to Unix itself. You're far better out using a Mac. ) When programming, editing, doing file and system management, writing scripts, doing network communications, source tree management... The Mac doesn't perform well in most of these areas. I'd prefer Unix above the Mac. Ever tried source tree management from the Finder? Ever written a script to perform daily tasks on a Mac? Ever tried to backup a section of your filing system using a Mac? In other words I hate the Mac for not having a cli. What I (and many other people I know) would like is a Mac alike system on a Unix backbone. A Mac IIfx with A/UX would be fine, but as most of you know is quite unaffordable. All stories I hear on the NeXT make me believe this is quite the system I'm waiting for. I wish I had the money to buy one. ANOTHER point. Many people here claim Unix is not for the rest of us. Why so? What are _you_ doing on the Mac? Using a word processor all day long? If you program a lot, then you'd probably use Unix too, if your computer ran it. If you are constantly logged in on a Unix host using a terminal emulator on the Mac, youd probably use Unix too if you had it. DON'T get me wrong, I'm not saying I don't like the Mac. I'm just trying to argument why I'd want a NeXT. Neither do I think that Unix is the ultimate operating system. It has it's flaws (especially system V :) and could be improved. I think both systems have their uses, and it would be a Good Thing to be able to use both on one machine. A Mac running A/UX would do this, but so would the NeXT. pooh PS: if Apple ][ -> Mac is a logical step, then why isn't Mac -> NeXT a logical step too? PPS: maybe it's more than 0.02, considering the length of what I've just written...