Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!usc!rutgers!pyrnj!pyrdc!lighthouse!rock From: rock@lighthouse.com Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: IBM Announces NextStep Message-ID: <1990Feb8.093156.15077@lighthouse.com> Date: 8 Feb 90 09:31:56 GMT References: <1990Feb6.181347.4457@lighthouse.com> Organization: Lighthouse Design, Ltd. Lines: 34 In-Reply-To: melling@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu's message of 7 Feb 90 01:59:10 GMT In article melling@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: >How compatible will these machines be? I've heard that software that runs >on the IBM machines with NextStep will still need a major rewrite to run >on the Next. The press release states the machines will maintain the same NextStep API (application programing interface). Thus, programs written for the NextStep environment on any machine should require only a recompile to run on any other. Of course, hardware differences will necessitate software changes. For instance, I doubt the IBM machines will have DSP chips, so programs making extensive use of the NeXT's sound capabilities will need to be changed to run on the IBMs. (Allegations that IBM has replaced Objective-C with C++ in their NextStep environment are plainly ridiculous. Eliminating Objective-C would require a lot of effort and would severly hamper efforts to port. (However, creating an additional AppKit interface for C++ would make a number of folks happy.)) Programs written for the current AIX machines will certainly need extensive modification to use NextStep well, as they use a completely different windowing universe. (Of course, command line Unix programs should port among all 4.3 machines without hassle.) However, AIX programs that use X should port quite easily after MIT releases the NeXT X. They'll just be ugly as sin. Roger Rosner Lighthouse Design, Ltd. NeXT Mail: rock@lighthouse.com or ...!uunet!lighthouse!rock