Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!blake!mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.ACS.Washington.EDU
From: mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.ACS.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: NeXT and sources
Message-ID: <651@blake.acs.washington.edu>
Date: 28 Jan 89 00:08:54 GMT
Sender: news@blake.acs.washington.edu
Organization: Mendou Zaibatsu, Tomobiki-Cho, Butsumetsu-Shi
Lines: 62


     Although I work at an organization which uses NeXT computers, I
am speaking for myself here.

     I am a serious software developer.  I own two DEC-20 mainframe
computers (including source license).  I have a NeXT at my regular job
(that's what Tomobiki-Cho is), and I'm seriously considering using the
NeXT as a software development platform off-work.  I'm attracted to
the NeXT as it has the basic functions needed, they seem to have the
right ideas for software development tools, and (in spite of a
personal distaste for Unix) I need a Unix platform in my environment
as part of my support to my DEC-20 users (for whom continued effective
communication with Unix systems is a high-priority item).

     I have an order form on my desk to purchase a NeXT for my
personal use at home.  It's filled out, and I have the funds to cover
the check.  There's no way in hell I'm gonna send that order in unless
sources are available.

     Steve Jobs' arguments against distributed sources are utterly
unconvincing.  It seems that he has failed to learn an important
lesson from the Apple experience.  The Macintosh operating system is
often lampooned as the "Fisher-Price operating system".  It is a
Mickey-Mouse OS, and the non-availability of sources guarantees it
will always be a Mickey-Mouse OS.  This was a strong factor which
influenced me not to purchase a MacII.

     In my opinion, ALL sources to critical components should be
available.  This is not just limited to the operating system; it also
includes the window system, directory browser, etc.  Maybe it'd be OK
if the InterfaceBuilder sources were kept secret since you could run
your machine without it -- although it seems a bit silly.  Source code
gives the power to fix critical problems, is the ultimate
documentation, and, yes, even allows customization by customers.

     This is not an argument to bundle sources with every NeXT.  It's
perfectly alright to sell sources as a separate product.  Not everyone
cares about sources.  Not everyone will buy sources.  But those who do
care, care a lot.  [And I have yet to hear people who don't care
chorusing that "sources should not be released."]

     Presently, because I decline to use YP in my development
environment, my NeXT is not doing host name recognition in virtually
all network utilities.  I am now going through the agonizing task of
getting sources for individual components from the net (many of which
are publicly available via FTP from Berkeley!) and rebuilding all
these components to use the resolver version of gethostbyname().

     It is sheer arrogance not to make sources available to customers.
My reaction as a potential customer is to answer arrogance with not
buying the product and not committing to the platform.  Sure, I'm
using a NeXT now, but a better box will come along in the future, and
I'll ask my boss to take the NeXT away and give me the new box.

     It is not too late for NeXT to undo the damage.  But every day
that NeXT waffles on the issue, more damage gets done.  If I didn't
care, if I didn't wish NeXT success, I wouldn't be sending this
message.

     Is NeXT listening?

-- Mark --