Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: NeXT Press Release Message-ID: <-54Gwp=?1@cs.psu.edu> Date: 29 Apr 91 22:28:41 GMT Article-I.D.: cs.-54Gwp=?1 References: <47889@ut-emx.uucp> <47946@ut-emx.uucp> <6o6G#_oz1@cs.psu.edu> <48101@ut-emx.uucp> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 48 In-Reply-To: greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu's message of 29 Apr 91 16:22:25 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <48101@ut-emx.uucp> greg@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Greg Harp) writes: > >Wrong. The PC is a standard! I hate to break it to you. Excuse me while a laugh a while... There. That's better. Please bother to get some experience with the PeeCee line before trying to make statements like that. Ask any person who has developed for that line how many times they have had to "port" their code to a different configuration of this so-called "standard" machine. It can be a significant amount of the development time in graphics-related applications like the ones I have done. Also, try working with more than the 640K DOS memory limit. There are different ways to do it depending on the CPU and what kind of memory it is. I don't call that standard by any means. There are over 25 million IBM compatibles(probably many more), so it is the standard. I think that we are arguing about two different things here. And obviously I don't think much of the "standard". >Buy an Objective C compiler for the PeeCee or Sun workstation then. >Objective C is a lot easier to learn than C++, which I learned first. Why? C++ is already an accepted standard. I've never even seen an ad for an Objective C compiler (not that I've been looking for one). Besides, ease of learning is generally an opinion. Well, that's because only one computer company uses Objective C as its standard programming language. Stepstone does sell Obj. C for several platforms, and I have seen a verion for the PeeCee. And before you go spouting off about how great C++ is, could you check out Eiffel or Smalltalk? >If you think having source is better, then tell Commodore. When they >release their IB with Amiga DOS 3.0 in 1999, you will have the IB that >you've always wanted. Bzzt. Interface-building software has been available for the Amiga longer than the 040 NeXT has been available. Could you rattle off a few names so that I could look at them? You sound like the kind of guy that would Bzzt me even all the IB's were not quite up to par. -Mike