Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!mintaka!mole.ai.mit.edu!rjc From: rjc@mole.ai.mit.edu (Ray Cromwell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: How to beat a NeXT Summary: A real, fair comparision of Amiga vs NeXT Keywords: nexts, suck, unexpandible, slow Message-ID: <1991Feb12.043247.6171@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Date: 12 Feb 91 04:32:47 GMT References: <7692@sugar.hackercorp.com> <481@cronos.metaphor.com> <1991Feb11.023952.19951@NCoast.ORG> Sender: daemon@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Lucifer Maleficius) Organization: None Lines: 106 Ok, you asked for the real comparison? Well here it is. The Amiga 500 (slab) vs NeXT (slab) NeXT Slab $3200 Amiga 500 $500 040 CPU board $1500 * Unix $500-800 ? A2024 $600 ? ---------------------------------- --------------------------------- Total: $3200-3400 $3200 * - The 040 board will includes a cheap SCSI controller ($200) cheap ethernet, and a 100mb HD and 8mb of ram. (note: If this were integrated and priced educationally the ram/A500/Unix/2024 would be cheaper) Comparisons: The A500 will run AmigaDOS and AT&T Unix (1 point for the Amiga!) Has color (1 point) Has 1 expansion slot (heheh 1 point) NeXT has DSP (1 point for NeXT) Summary: While this is a fantasy comparison, it just shows that you can take just about any computer, strip it down, add in an 040 and it will price about the same as the NeXT. Not only that, My A500 slab STILL looks more attractive than the NeXT because it also comes with AmigaDOS, an expansion slot and color (optional monitor). The recent threads in this conference really depress me. People are acting like Apple/Ibm. Remember these old lines: "You don't need multitasking!" "You don't need color!" "You don't need sound!" and now "You don't need expansion slots." Sheesh, what's next? "You don't need a computer, use pencil and paper." Some of those old lines came from Apple and IBM who used to brainwash their consumers telling them what they do and don't need. Not everyone needs everything, but I think a computer should deliver ALL of the above and MORE as standard operating equipment. Why? Because when you push up the lowest common denominator of hardware/software, you're not held back by 'backwards compatibility.' Better yet, when a computer has certain features built in as default programs tend to use these features more readily. The only reason this doesn't work with the IBM is because of the sheer size of the market. It's so big and there are so many companies that almost every little third party hardware enhancement/os improvement gets supported adequately. If a company creates a DSP board for the Amiga, maybe 2 or 3 software companies will support it (depending how popular it is), if you did the same thing on the IBM, you could generate 30-40 packages that support it perhaps more, just for that small little niche. Now 'integrated computer' and 'open computer' are not mutually exclusive. Its possible to build a computer with everything a user could think of needing. But you cannot forsee the future, thats why it's better to plan for the future and make your computer 'open' instead of being so arrogant to think that you know what the user wants, and what he will want in the future. One or two NeXT users mentioned 'If I ever want to upgrade my CPU or graphics , I'll just sell my NeXT and buy a different model.' THIS IS NOT A SOLUTION. It's one of the reasons expansion slots were invented. I don't want my computer to become obsolete every 1 or 2 years when a new processor revision/hardware add-on becomes availible forcing me to buy a new model. The more expensive computers are, the more open they should be. I don't mind selling a C64 to get a C128. But if a $10,000 computer becomes obsolete every 1 or 2 years, its a problem. (Imagine how difficult it would be to replace all the computers on the internet everytime a new Ethernet card/software became availible.) My end opinion is that the slab is not the 'NeXT generation of computers for the 90s.' In 1, perhaps 2 years it could become obsoleted by an A3000 with a faster 040 card, 050,etc. The Cube may be able to compete, but the price needs to fall. Someone mentioned that the SPARC is not very expandible either. True, look at the consequences. CISC computers (pcs, etc) have been able to 'catch up' with SPARCstations. If it was possible to merely place a card in the SPARCStation 1, and instantly turn it into a SPARCStation2, SPARC would still be in the lead. Who will buy the A3000UX? Perhaps people who want an expandible machine, perhaps people who want AmigaDOS and Unix (to possible cross develop), perhaps people who want the video capabilities of the Amiga, and Unix. I dunno. People buy IBMs everyday yet there are other more technologically advanced computers out there. The choice to buy the A3000UX won't be based on SPEC sheets alone, and neither will the purchases of NeXTs, Sun's, VAXes, or any other computer for that matter. The same goes for CDTV, Atari STs, Macs, Nitendo's etc.