Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!polyslo!petunia!news From: mdeale@vega.acs.calpoly.edu (Myron Deale) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next Subject: Re: IBM Kills NeXT !! Keywords: DSP Message-ID: <25e1db65.7077@petunia.CalPoly.EDU> Date: 21 Feb 90 00:05:57 GMT References: <8059@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <1654@mit-amt.MEDIA.MIT.EDU> <1550@awdprime.UUCP> <1564@awdprime.UUCP> Reply-To: mdeale@vega.acs.calpoly.edu.UUCP (Myron Deale) Organization: ACS, Cal Poly, San Luis Lines: 69 In article <1564@awdprime.UUCP> @cs.utexas.edu:ibmchs!auschs!woan.austin.ibm.com!ron writes: >In article <8059@pt.cs.cmu.edu>, dandb@k.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Dean Rubine) writes: >|>In <1550@awdprime.UUCP> ron@woan.austin.ibm.com (Ronald S. Woan) replies: >|>>Remeber you got SCSI support and a micro-channel bus, so adding the >|>>DSP will be no problem. >|> >|>To me, the great thing about the NeXT was that it came with all >|>sorts of stuff as standard equipment. As a developer, I'll be much >|>more tempted to write applications which use the NeXT sound chip, >|>since I know there will be one on every machine. > >I have to agree with you here. Raising the lowest common denominator You lost me. >does indeed make it easier on the developers to use things suchs as >the DSP. Unfortunately, there are few main stream applications that To put the shoe on the other foot, how many applications use NextStep? or AIX? I always love it when Byte evaluates a new computer, "Gee, it's really nifty, but dang! there's no software yet. Why can't these computer makers ever do anything right?" DSP has never been "popular" or mainstream before. Perhaps now there is a possibility. >require the DSP these days. You might say in that regard that we are >not a leader in pushing this type of technology, but you would also Ok, I'll say it. IBM is not a leader in pushing this type of technology (though your DRAMs are gnarly). I liked what one fellow in comp.arch said (and I paraphrase), "All the performance, all the widgets, none of the spirit." Well, shucks, you can't take spirit to the bank anyway. > ... >digitized sound files. Also consider the DSP as just a quick 24(?)-bit >floating point processor and compare our MFLOPS rating (32-bit). Do I get to compare your MFLOPS rating against a TMS320C30 from TI? or even better, a DSP96002 from Motorola (kind of 2nd gen 56K). Digital Signal Processors are specialized for a purpose. The NeXT may be stretching definition a bit, but I think the gamble will pay off. >When DSP applications become mainstream, as have intensive floating >point applications, you will see DSP standard in everyones' machines. Read this as, when all the NeXT enthusiasts get used to developing code for the DSP and have a tremendous leg up on the rest of the industry, when folks see the great stuff NeXT developers are producing then "you will see DSP standard in everyones' machines." > ... >commited to it) will be one of the leaders in bringing out the OSF/1/2 >OS with a MACH kernel and (golly gee) AIX interface. >+ Ronald S. Woan (IBM VNET)WOAN AT AUSTIN, (AUSTIN)ron@woan.austin.ibm.com + I apologize for bagging on you and your company. I've been waiting months for this. Ever since the August headlines in EDN, "IBM file servers due next month." IBM seems to have a hot processor (ok, more than seems :) But I know better than to roll over, and you know better than to suggest. -Myron // mdeale@cosmos.acs.calpoly.edu