Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!midway!news
From: gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!!
Message-ID: <1990Nov9.231258.20579@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 9 Nov 90 23:59:59 GMT
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: University of Chicago Graduate School of Business
Lines: 67

------
In article <1990Nov9.224209.18758@agate.berkeley.edu>, knrgroup@garnet.berkeley.edu (Raymond group) writes...
 
>gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
>>when you start resorting to non-factual claims ....
> 
>Non-factual?  Say that that System 7.0 takes about 1 MB of the 2 MB of RAM
>that comes standard.  Say that the NeXT has a whopping 4 MB of overhead 
>(it's probably less than this), this still leaves 4 MB free on a minimally
>configured NeXT as opposed to a 1 MB for a Mac.

I have no idea what you're ranting about.  You said that that 8 MB on a Next is
functionally equivalent to 8 MB on a Mac.  That is not true.  If the Next takes
-- as you say -- 4 MB and the Mac takes, say, 1.5 MB, then there are
respectively 4 and 6.5 MB left over.  And that was all I was saying: that
comparably equipped Macs and Nexts (RAM and HD) are not really comparable,
since the Next uses more overhead in RAM and HD.

>  And the disadvantages of
>the large overhead on the NeXT, IMHO, are outweighed by the advantages of
>Display PostScript and the hidden but ever-present power of Unix.  

That's your opinion.  There are certainly advantages to Display Postscript, but
there are disadvantages too (the chief being speed).  Also, in the
not-too-distant future QuickDraw is likely to incorporate all (or perhaps more)
of the functionality of DPS.  The "hidden but ever-present power of Unix"
really only brings major advantages to those who need to take advantage of it
(although I would say that protected memory brings advantages to even the most
naive user).

>As for your accusation that I made any non-factual claims.  This is kind of
>funny from the guy who told me that a LaserWriter NT was comparable in price
>to a NeXT laser printer, and then allowed me to take the flack because I
>assumed you were talking about the non-PostScript laser printer for the Mac,
>the ONLY Apple Laser printer comparable in price to the NeXT's.  The SC, by
>the way, retails for $200 more than the NeXT laser printer.  The NT costs
>almost twice as much as NeXT's laser printer.  


Mellow out.  There were several people posting from the U of Chicago, and I
think you've mixed me up with someone else.  I don't recall getting involved in
the laser printer aspect of this flame war.  I do recall seeing someone
attributing to me something about the topic you mentioned, although I'd never
written it.  Didn't seem important to correct it at the time.  Perhaps I should
have to avoid this.

[...]
>However, if you would care to use and/or program on a NeXT for a while,
>you will see what all my words are attempting to describe.

Hey, if you're willing to give one away, I'm game. :->  Seriously, given the
volume of your postings, I think you're taking this all to seriously.  The Next
is really cool, and so is the Mac.  The Next is taking the innovative lead for
now, and likely the Mac (or whatever Apple comes up with to come after the Mac)
will surpass the Next at some point.  I remember when the Next first came out
everyone on the net was saying "Sell your Sun stock!  Sun is dead!".  Well, Sun
isn't dead, and may in fact do better than Next.  Just shows you you shouldn't
write off any company too quickly.  And Apple is no exception.

Robert


============================================================================
= gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu * generic disclaimer: * "It's more fun to =
=            		         * all my opinions are *  compute"         =
=                                * mine                *  -Kraftwerk       =
============================================================================