Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:44632 comp.sys.next:4448
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucsd!hub!6600pete
From: 6600pete@hub.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: What do I want to see in the Apple of the 90's?
Message-ID: <3361@hub.UUCP>
Date: 19 Dec 89 01:54:32 GMT
References: <23143@brunix.UUCP>
Sender: news@hub.UUCP
Lines: 55

From article <23143@brunix.UUCP>, by rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony):
>>I wasn't saying it WAS worth anything. I was pointing out that spooling was
>>available for Mac PS printing with the implication that it wasn't on
>>the NeXT.
> Spooling IS on the NeXT. What makes the print process stall the 
> whole machine is that the printer has no postscript interpreter
> and the WINDOW-SERVER can't interpret postscript for the screen
> and for the printer at the same time.

OK, but then we get into an argument about where printing begins and ends. Is it
the PostScript interpreter's fault that printing slows the NeXT to a crawl or
is the print spooler's (lpr's?). I don't know -- that's probably a
philosophical issue, and I've had enough philosophy for one education,
thank you.

> As soon as you print on a printer with it's own postscript engine, there
> is hardly any noticable slowdown, there is complete spooling as in any UNIX
> system.

...and the printer most likely to be used...

OK, OK, that's not fair. But it does illuminate a point: we're talking about
standard features. Otherwise, I could wail about how easy it is to install
EtherNet support on the Mac.

>>Price tag is irrelevant, as I said before
> Well, if it is irrelevant, why are all people talking about 
> bang/buck ratio? Just send me your superflous money, I'll take
> care of it...

Are they? I don't think I've seen that phrase used yet. I said cost wasn't an
issue because we aren't talking about having to buy one, we're talking about
various design choices. If you'll read my previous articles, you'll see I've
gone to great pains to divorce marketing, which probably has the most bearing
on pricing, from the actual design of the machine. It's a issue worth
considering, but I personally am not interested in it. At least not in this
flame war.

>>Hmmmm. The sheer _amount_ of rules for the Mac UI is larger than the
>>corresponding amount for the NeXT. Given what we've learned about the amount
>>of deviation to which programmers subscribe on the Mac, what's going to happen
>>when Microsoft releases Word for the NeXT? Ugh.
> Maybe it is not how MANY guidelines there are, but WHAT guidelines.
> The more there are, the less I'll remember them all, and the less
> consistent will my programs be.

All right, you got me. What I was trying to communicate was that Apple pretty
much puts developers in a straighjacket. And I don't mean that negatively, of
course. I mean it to be the best possible thing they could be doing. Mac would
have failed without the straightjacket. NeXT seems to have the Toolbox without
the conscience.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Gontier   | InterNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu, BitNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa
Editor, Macker | Online Macintosh Programming Journal; mail for subscription
Hire this kid  | Mac, DOS, C, Pascal, asm, excellent communication skills