Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!brunix!rca From: rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Freewhare hurts the NeXT (was Re: Desktop publishing) Message-ID: <70367@brunix.UUCP> Date: 31 Mar 91 03:22:39 GMT References: <1656@TALOS.UUCP> <1446@toaster.SFSU.EDU> <1991Mar30.063733.27117@news.cs.indiana.edu> Sender: news@brunix.UUCP Reply-To: rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science Lines: 79 In article <1991Mar30.063733.27117@news.cs.indiana.edu> jashley@loanshark.cs.indiana.edu (J. Michael Ashley) writes: >In article <1446@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes: >>One of the reasons >>there aren't "hundreds of add-ons" for the NeXT is that THEY'RE >>JUST NOT NEEDED. And if someone wants to reinvent a wheel for >>profit, they have to do a better job than what's already there >>"for free." > >It's bad, because GNU cc is *not* the last word in C compilers. I am >positive that several or even lots of people out there are capable of >writing a C compiler that will smoke gcc, but they're never going to write >it, because they can't compete against a free product. Why should the says who? If something is good enough, people will buy it. Also, if NeXT writes it's own compiler or improves the GNU stuff does not matter. In either case a basic C-compiler will be included in the system. >sell their compiler in the first place? Because they have to eat, that's >why. GNU gets grants from corporations and the government; not everybody >is that lucky. Getting grants here is the same as being paid. If GNU stuff weren't any good, then there would be no interest. >Furthermore, free software tends to be poorly supported, and I would >lose sleep at night if I knew my hypothetical company was depending on >unsupported software. Yeah, I know there are businesses that exist to >support GNU software, but that doesn't invalidate my previous point, and >at any rate, they only support GNU software. What do you expect? Did you ever see Microsoft support Lotus software or vice versa? As long as you CAN make a support contract with someone, it is your problem if you do so. You always get what you pay for, but sometimes you get more. Also, the fact that NeXT uses GNU software does not mean it is not supported. So far the support I got from NeXT was far superior to what I got from any other comparable company (that does not mean it could not sometimes be even better, but that's not the point) >NeXT will never have strong software as long as this deluge of free software >exists. Has a situation similar to this existed in another economic market? This statement lacks any basis. The software that is around is pretty high quality and only keeps those away that can't do any better. Given the time NeXT is on the market there is quite a reasonable number of programs out there. The only way the free software can hurt NeXT is that people like you do not like quality but quantity. The nicest example for this was back in the early 80s when IBM came out with the PC in Europe. (I have to mention that IBM introduced the PC in Europe quite a bit later than in the States). So a year before IBM sold the PC, there was another computer Sirius on the market (nowadays they are called Victor and produce only PC clones). This Sirius had a 400x800 16 gray scale graphics display, 8-bit digital sound, volume and brightness control from the keyboard, 1.2 MB disk drives and a completely glare-free monitor. The case of this thing was dark gray (maybe it was even black). If you think that sounds like a NeXT, then you are right, this computer (although 8088 based) was still quite advanced for it's time. By the time IBM put it's 64KB, 80x25 text 320KB Floppy machine on the market for the same price as the Sirius, the latter had a big advantage over the IBM: Sirius had close to 2000 software packages and was a clear market leader. Now guess why now IBM is the standart? Well the PC had nothing, you just could not work with it. After a short while everyone produced add-ons: Graphics adaptors that were still inferior to the Sirius, etc. The result was that in a typical computer magazine there was one add for the Sirius, one for the IBM and about 50 for products that turned the PC into a usable machine. Thats why people like you thought: OH, IBM MUST BE SOOO GREAT! and they went on and bought it. And the rest of the world still suffers... Ronald ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." G.B. Shaw | rca@cs.brown.edu or antony@browncog.bitnet