Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:680 comp.society.futures:685
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!gatech!rutgers!rochester!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!ur-valhalla!micropen!dave
From: dave@micropen (David F. Carlson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: NeXT not revolutionary enough?
Summary: just a thought
Message-ID: <583@micropen>
Date: 8 Nov 88 19:53:39 GMT
References: <471@wucs1.wustl.edu> <4391@ubc-cs.UUCP> <485@wucs1.wustl.edu> <4429@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Micropen Dirent Writing Systems, Pittsford, NY
Lines: 33

In article <4429@ubc-cs.UUCP>, manis@faculty.cs.ubc.ca (Vincent Manis) writes:
> In article <4069@encore.UUCP> bzs@encore.com (Barry Shein) writes:
> >There are a lot of other examples, like I said, don't make the best
> >the enemy of the good and say "Ah, computers are useless, no one has
> >even solved the halting problem yet!" which is what a lot of this
> >moaning and groaning sounds like.
> 
> I don't know whether the NeXT machine will be revolutionary in this sense.
> A lot will depend upon the fortunes of the company, and how their customers
> use the machine. I do however wish them well.
> 
> ____________  Vincent Manis                    | manis@cs.ubc.ca

Something on NeXT that I have seen so I'll say it:

Note that Apple's successes (and therefore arguably Job's) have not been
from the rev I machines.  Every see an Apple I or even an Apple II?  No,
the real success was the Apple II+ (which is still being sold in a slightly
different form today.)  Similarly the Mac was an anemic toy when first 
released:  tiny little B&W screen with 128K memory with no possibility of
expansion.  I was really the MAC II that made the Mac viable for anyone who
needs a real machine.

I have no reason to doubt that this machine for "academia" is just the 
Apple I for NeXT.  Its the NeXT II+ that I'm waiting for:  the machine
for the rest of us.


-- 
David F. Carlson, Micropen, Inc.
micropen!dave@ee.rochester.edu

"The faster I go, the behinder I get." --Lewis Carroll