Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!dg!rec From: rec@dg.dg.com (Robert Cousins) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland Keywords: NeXT, RISC, MACH, multiprocessing, bundled software Message-ID: <126@dg.dg.com> Date: 5 Apr 89 18:02:52 GMT References: <1554@neoucom.UUCP> <121@dg.dg.com> <1749@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> <123@dg.dg.com> <245@nueces.UUCP> Reply-To: rec@dg.UUCP (Robert Cousins) Organization: Data General, Westboro, MA. Lines: 98 In article <245@nueces.UUCP> chari@nueces.UUCP (Chris Whatley) writes: >While the endless arguments about new processors & speed vs. old processors >& compatibility are no more intersting than ever, I have to nitpick here... > >> I disagree. There are not currently more than 40 developers working >> to develop NeXT compatible hardware and software offerings of the class >> and magnitude of those in 88/Open. The list of ISV's supporting the >> software initiative includes: >>[list of developers] >> Not bad, huh? > >No, not at all except you are wrong about Next's development agreements. At >a recent press conference, Jobs said "85" companies are developing hardware >and software for the Next. As for class and magnitude, I'm sure they are >quite similar since many of the companies you listed and many of the companies >that develop for Next are either the same company (Absoft, etc.) or are porting >some garbage from MS-DOS (Lotus & WordPerfect). > >> Robert Cousins >> Speaking for himself, not DG. > >Chris The width of the software available under 88/Open encompases numerous areas which is not currently covered in the NeXT announcement. Only time will tell whether the difference is substantial enough to be important in the long run. This is a place where people of good faith can disagree and where a person's perspective will have great impact on the definitions of "class" and "magnitude." Since the 88K has the ability to run many applications which will roll over and die on the NeXT, I would suggest that there is a substantial magnitude of software which will be available on 88K machines which won't be there on the NeXT. As for the class of software, I think that it speaks for itself. Anyway, I think that I did not make myself clear. There is currently only one company building hardware to run NeXT compatible applications -- NeXT. In other words, given a NeXT port of a piece of software, there will be exactly one choice of hardware upon which to run it. This is not the case in the 88K world. The implications of this are many so I will limit myself to some of the most important ones. 1. There is already a large dynamic performance range of 88K ABI compatible products. This stretches from 17 MIPS up past 40 and will probably break 100 MIPS before the end of the year. Furthermore, it was pointed out at the AViiON announcement that DG will eventually be offering a 500+ MIPS quad processor. Therefore, one can develop code on one machine and migrate the binary up to a machine of the required performance. This also means that it becomes reasonable to have a heterogenous network of 88K ABI compliant machines sharing the same file server with only one set of binaries. 2. The price range varies as substantially as the dynamic performance does. From 17 MIPS at under $8k all the way up to multiprocessor servers in the $100+ K range. Capabilities vary as well. There will be sufficiently diverse specialized machines (all ABI compliant) to handle a wide slice of the computing world -- MUCH wider than a single machine from a single vendor. 3. Since there is no NeXT high end, lets compare the single data point to the available 88K systems. Aside from the substantial CPU performance difference, there are machines with faster graphics, higher resolution screens, better I/O, more expandibility (VME or NuBUS the Apple way) along with a host of other important feature choices. 4. There are multiple COMPATIBLE operating systems to choose from. DG offers DG/UX (multiprocessor, System V.3 with 98% of BSD), Unisoft offers both UniPlus and UNIX. Several other companies are actively developing ABI compatible operating systems also. In short, you will have your choice. I have even heard rumors at 88/Open meetings that Mach will be ported to one or more of the platforms. 5. Bang for the buck. Can you buy a NeXT machine for $500/MIPS? 6. The competition between ABI compliant products will be based upon value and performance. This means that end users will always be able to change vendors without sacrificing software investments. I can't think of a better way to motivate hardware vendors to keep the bang/$ improving at a fast clip. I obviously could keep going for quite some period of time. There was a plan to create a 68K ABI, but it didn't work due to vendors who liked to be incompatible. As of now, I know of only two de facto ABIs in the microprocessor based world: the 88K ABI and the PC clone environment using MS-DOS. They are the only ones I know of where several vendors are able to develop compatible platforms and where developers are able to follow some well defined rules for binary portability. Numerous other products can claim one but not both. These include POSIX (source code portability only), Apple Mac (but only one hardware vendor), CP/M machines (no well defined rules for portability but numerous vendors), and lastly, NeXT where there seems to be similar problems. Robert Cousins Speaking for myself alone.