This is The-NeXT-and-the-mac. in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 19-Dec-1989 02:30:56 From: sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Sho Kuwamoto) Subject: The NeXT and the mac. (Not so flamey, but not so peaceful either.) On one hand, I like to think of myself as mature, reasonable, etc. On the other hand, I completely disagree with all these people who say, "children, children, let's not fight about which machine is better." Give me blood, I say. So I guess I have to justify this. First, my position. I, for one, will prboably end up on the mac side of the war. I look at these guys who say, "I have a mac now, but I wish I had a NeXT," and suspect that in 9 cases out of 10, they don't know what they are talking about. This is one of the benefits of this flame war: it provides information. Certain issues -- such as whether the MS-DOS command line interface is better than the Mac's graphical user interface -- have already been chewed over so much that we are all sick and tired of it. In either case, both machines are now fairly well known, and most people have a good idea of the differences between the two machines. People are less aware of the differences betweeen the NeXT and the mac. Jobs has done a good job of creating a mystique to go along with his machine. You get people like me drooling over it before it was released. There are a lot of neat features, and the graphics arts people must ahve been working overtime. It's built on UNIX, and seems easier to program. Etc., etc. A flame war like this can point out the realistic deficiencies of the NeXT system. Even the most die-hard NeXT machine fans must realize that the machine is not right for everyone. Another reason why I feel this flame war is more productive than a typical religious war is this: in this case, we are looking at two machines which are more similar than they are different. Sure, you can buy Windows for your PC, but the philosophy of IBM PC's is substantially different from the philosphy of the Mac or the NeXT. They target different areas, approach things in a different way, etc., but it's my contention that the two systems are similar enough to make the argument that much more interesting. An acid test? After going through a round of these arguments, can you think of ways in which your current computer system could be improved? Well, in my case, I can imagine how the mac could be changed after looking at the NeXT box. I can't speak for others, but I hope that the NeXT machine isn't so vastly superior to the mac in all areas that there is no point in looking to the mac for guidance in certain areas. Granted, the two cases are slightly different, the most important factor being that the NeXT machine was designed after the mac. Still, if there is some basis for arugument, I must belive that some of the input must have been constructive. And I don't mean a rehash of the old, "no software, problems with distribution, no third party hardware, no vertical market applications," stuff. So, while some of the arguemnt is futile, I find a lot of it intriguing. What are the points that people find annoying about the "other" system? What do users lust after in the "other" system? -Sho
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.