Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!apple!vsi1!zorch!ditka!slacvm!pfkeb
From: PFKEB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Paul Kunz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: NeXTstep port to rs6000
Message-ID: <91023.205848PFKEB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 24 Jan 91 04:58:47 GMT
References: <68@oink.UUCP> <224@rosie.NeXT.COM>
Sender: tandem!unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU!daemon
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Lines: 30


   I can make no official statement about NextStep on the RS/6000 either
but given there is much confusion about what NextStep on the RS/6000 means
I think I should make a few statements which should be commonly known...

- NextStep 1.0 is running on the RS/6000 and has been shown by IBM at many
trade shows.   I even saw it at the SHARE (IBM users group) meeting in
Paris France last fall.

- NextStep on the RS/6000 uses Objective-C, just like on the NeXT.
All rumors of IBM using C++ instead of Objective-C are completely false.

- I've ported my project, Reason (that was mentioned in the BaNG meeting
review posted here), to NextStep on the RS/6000.  Due to the non-disclosure
terms by which I obtained NextStep for the RS/6000, I can not give any
details of the difficulty or non-difficulty of the port, but I will be
demonstrating my NextStep application at the SHARE meeting in San
Francisco next month.  Also, don't ask me to compare speed or other
attributes of my application on the RS/6000; I can't tell you.

- The following is opinion, not fact: Why should IBM start shipping
NextStep 1.0, just when NeXT is shipping 2.0?  You all know how much
better (IMHO) 2.0 is over 1.0.

- Don't ask me when IBM will start shipping NextStep 2.0, I wish I
knew myself.

   I hope this posting clears the air about NextStep under IBM's AIX,
and I hope it doesn't get me into trouble by exposing something that
is not public knowledge.