Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!samsung!dali.cs.montana.edu!caen!uwm.edu!linac!mp.cs.niu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu!dorner
From: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: what I want to see in future Apple computers
Message-ID: <1991Jun18.013705.3372@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 18 Jun 91 01:37:05 GMT
References: <5282@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> <1991Jun17.145312.20601@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <5294@dirac.physics.purdue.edu>
Sender: usenet@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Organization: University of Illinois at U-C
Lines: 22

In article <5294@dirac.physics.purdue.edu> sho@gibbs.physics.purdue.edu (Sho Kuwamoto) writes:
>fictional language.  All method calls would be resolved at runtime,
>and all data would be hidden.  This would allow you to do things like
>run ResEditII, replace an object with a replacement, and run the
>program without recompiling.  We would be able to swap code like this
>since the behavior an object would be defined strictly by the behavior
>of its methods.

Stop it.  Stop describing NeXT machines.  Just buy one :-).

>Of course, there are things the Mac does *better* than the NeXT, but
>that doesn't really affect my argument.  

I won't do it.  I just won't bite on this one.  I use both systems all day
long, but I just won't bite.

I also don't want to start a NeXT vs Mac war.  Sho just keeps talking about
his "ideal" computer, and it sounds so strikingly like the cube that I just
had to point it out.
--
Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office
Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu  UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner