This is My-opinion-on-NeXT-prices... in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 12-Sep-1991 04:48:55 From: ejen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Edward K Jen) Subject: My opinion on NeXT prices... It has been mentioned that NeXT prices are going to appreciate at some point in the near future. I am of this mind. NeXT is either losing money or barely breaking even on the systems they sell. It seems as if their marketing strategy is to get people to buy a NeXT, and then hopefully stick with it. This is supported by the fact that an 8/105 system starts at around $3300 but the prices substantially increase when other items, i.e. extra RAM or bigger hard drive, are added. And the longterm usefulness of the 8/105 config is also questionable. Not much hard drive space being the biggest concern... The problem with NeXT is that the software VARIETY is not available in anywhere near the quantities of other competitive workstations. Without software support, NeXT has a bleak future. But in order to obtain this support from software vendors, NeXT must make their systems as attractive as possible. So it seems they are gambling on losses now in order to gain more extensive software support and consequently a more substantial market share in the future. Will this strategy work though? That is another question...in terms of a target market, NeXT seems centered around engineers (non-CAD), scientists, programmers, and interactive video. I think they would like to dent the PC market, but are unable to do so due to NeXT's elitist reputation. People are actually afraid of using it. And if they can get a DOS or Mac for less, then they are even more inclined to discard NeXT from the get-go. So what must NeXT do to make their systems more attractive? First and most obviously, they must gain software support, ESPECIALLY in CAD. Autodesk must be convinced to write AutoCAD for the NeXT. The platform seems ideal for such a task, with its large monitor and meaty processor. Another idea would be for NeXT to form a startup software company to develop software which covers NeXT's deficiencies. Second, they must speed the release of the successor to the slab, whether it be a RISC machine or a faster CPU. Apple is about to release the Macintosh IIex, which is rumored to do around 15 MIPS also...This machine could seriously dent NeXT's market share on low-end slabs. The high-end slabs and cubes seem to already be competing with Suns, HPs and IBMs, and not doing so well either. I truly believe that the NeXT is a wonderful machine. I also believe that the machine has been extremely well engineered. Everyone who owns a NeXT knows this. Extremely smooth (except in the 8/105 slab with a full HD, or even any 8/HD slab with a full HD). The niche it occupies though is small, and getting even smaller, with Macintosh pushing up, and the other workstation manufacturers pushing down. In a nutshell, it comes down to this: If NeXT can earn enough money to cover R&D expenditures in an attempt to stay ahead of the competition over the next few years while also expanding in the software department, then they have a chance. Otherwise, the NeXT might turn into another Lisa... IMHO, Ed BTW, I do not own a NeXT. I work at a university computer store which carries the NeXT line...
Date: Sun 12-Sep-1991 16:32:06 From: mcarling@leland.stanford.edu (M Carling) Subject: Re: My opinion on NeXT prices... In article <9109120448.AA09124@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ejen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Edward K Jen) writes: [stuff deleted] > Another idea would be for NeXT to form a startup software company > to develop software which covers NeXT's deficiencies. [stuff deleted] Watch for NeXT to do this in the next few weeks. M
Date: Sun 12-Sep-1991 19:40:21 From: ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu (Ernest Prabhakar) Subject: Re: My opinion on NeXT prices... In article <9109120448.AA09124@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ejen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Edward K Jen) writes: >... > I am of this mind. NeXT is either losing money or barely > breaking even on the systems they sell.... True enough, except on memory and hard drives :-} > The problem with NeXT is that the software VARIETY is not > available in anywhere near the quantities of other > competitive workstations... True enough, but: a) It takes at least one-two years for a major software project, which is roughly the age of the machine. Look for a lot of stuff in the next year. b) The bundled tools and development environment mean that a lot of stuff will be written by people who would otherwise be dumb (as in mute) users. c) Has anyone compared the <<rate>> of product increase, instead of merely the volume of existing product? >... Will this strategy work > though? That is another question...in terms of a target > market, NeXT seems centered around engineers > (non-CAD), scientists, programmers, and interactive > video. I think they would like to dent the PC market, but > are unable to do so due to NeXT's elitist reputation. > People are actually afraid of using it. And if they can get > a DOS or Mac for less, then they are even more inclined to > discard NeXT from the get-go. I disagree strongly here. The "professional workstation" designation seems almost TOO business-oriented, if anything. Read the September NeXTWorld for information on how businesses (over 60% of sales) are responding. NeXT is extremely competitive with a networked '486 with a large graphics display, although it is certainly more expensive than less functional machines :-) > So what must NeXT do to make their systems more > attractive? First and most obviously, they must gain > software support, ESPECIALLY in CAD... True enough. > Second, they must speed the > release of the successor to the slab, whether it be a RISC > machine or a faster CPU. ... The niche it occupies > though is small, and getting even smaller, with > Macintosh pushing up, and the other workstation > manufacturers pushing down. > True up to a point. While the niche is smaller, the market for that niche is exploding (according to IDC) Further, both workstations and PCs become extremely twisted (can you say Windows 3.0 :-) when they try to imitate each other. NeXT is the real thing. If enough people had seen a NeXT, they would realize there is no comparison for doing so much so easily. Unfortunately, not enough have, so in practice you may be right. True, NeXT is not as cheap as a low-end PC nor as fast as high-end RISC. In many cases this should not matter, but all too often it does. > In a nutshell, it comes down to this: If NeXT can earn > enough money to cover R&D expenditures in an attempt to > stay ahead of the competition over the next few years > while also expanding in the software department, then > they have a chance. Otherwise, the NeXT might turn into > another Lisa... > Heavens, no, not that bad! Did anybody ever like those? At worst, it might become another Amiga: highly respected in a niche, but discounted by the mainstream. All NeXT really needs is a fine balance of foolishness: a) competitors foolish enough to not be as good as NeXT b) people NOT foolish enough to buy them Personally, I think (a) more likely than (b), but one can always hope. -ENP
Date: Sun 13-Sep-1991 16:14:47 From: jfr@locus.com (Jon Rosen) Subject: Re: My opinion on NeXT prices... In article <1991Sep12.194021.12907@cco.caltech.edu> ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu (Ernest Prabhakar) writes: >In article ><9109120448.AA09124@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> >ejen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Edward K Jen) writes: >>... >>[stuff deleted] >> In a nutshell, it comes down to this: If NeXT can earn >> enough money to cover R&D expenditures in an attempt to >> stay ahead of the competition over the next few years >> while also expanding in the software department, then >> they have a chance. Otherwise, the NeXT might turn into >> another Lisa... >> >Heavens, no, not that bad! Did anybody ever like those? Of course we did! It was a revolutionary machine, the Lisa was! And it even had something that the Mac didn't have (and still DOESN'T have, that is multitasking and that was in 1983!). Actually, NeXT has already had its Lisa. I refer of course to the 68030 Cube. It was overpriced for the then-current market (Lisa cost $10,000, Cube about the same), underpowered (Lisa had a 68000 but the multitasking operating system was too much for that little processor, whereas the Cube had the 68030 with NeXTstep and Mach), and yet a revolution at the time. The main difference between the Lisa-Mac transition and the early NeXT-later NeXT transition is that Apple had to abandon the Lisa software platform (except for the actual compiler environment) whereas NeXT was able to cure the problems in their early entry with a better processor and lower price. I have gone back and done a little checking in some old mags. The relative price/performance of the first Macintosh to the then-current PC market is actually much worse than the relative price/performance between the NeXT and the rest of the current PC marketplace. That is, the Mac was far more overpriced for what it delivered than the NeXT is today. It is just that the $5,000 base price tag is still foreboding even when compared to the first Mac's $2500 price tag (despite the fact that the NeXT is roughly 20x the computer for twice the price). Jon Rosen
Date: Sun 03-Oct-1991 02:54:40 From: aquinas@atop.ugcs.caltech.edu (Christopher M. Dicely) Subject: Re: My opinion on NeXT prices... ernest@pundit.cithep.caltech.edu (Ernest Prabhakar) writes: >In article ><9109120448.AA09124@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> >ejen@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Edward K Jen) writes: >>... >>... Will this strategy work >> though? That is another question...in terms of a target >> market, NeXT seems centered around engineers >> (non-CAD), scientists, programmers, and interactive >> video. I think they would like to dent the PC market, but >> are unable to do so due to NeXT's elitist reputation. >> People are actually afraid of using it. And if they can get >> a DOS or Mac for less, then they are even more inclined to >> discard NeXT from the get-go. >I disagree strongly here. The "professional workstation" designation seems >almost TOO business-oriented, if anything. Read the September NeXTWorld for >information on how businesses (over 60% of sales) are responding. NeXT is >extremely competitive with a networked '486 with a large graphics display, >although it is certainly more expensive than less functional machines :-) But it multitasks so much better... All those people who thought OS/2 was a good idea should go NeXT... >> So what must NeXT do to make their systems more >> attractive? First and most obviously, they must gain >> software support, ESPECIALLY in CAD... >True enough. Also, some "special market" software like music composition (MIDI) and other things would give them edges into markets where people would otherwise buy a Mac because, while it was inferior overall, it would do their general purpose stuff and their special purpose. >> Second, they must speed the >> release of the successor to the slab, whether it be a RISC >> machine or a faster CPU. ... The niche it occupies >> though is small, and getting even smaller, with >> Macintosh pushing up, and the other workstation >> manufacturers pushing down. >> >True up to a point. While the niche is smaller, the market for that niche is >exploding (according to IDC) Further, both workstations and PCs become >extremely twisted (can you say Windows 3.0 :-) when they try to imitate each >other. NeXT is the real thing. If enough people had seen a NeXT, they would >realize there is no comparison for doing so much so easily. Unfortunately, not >enough have, so in practice you may be right. True, NeXT is not as cheap as a >low-end PC nor as fast as high-end RISC. In many cases this should not matter, >but all too often it does. Yes, but it is as cheap and FASTER than I high-end PC. And the Mac, in ability for the same price, doesn't even approach it. The NeXTstation is really, the ultimate "power PC" with the exception (perhaps) of multiprocessing systems like the Compaq Systempro that are FAR more expensive. >> In a nutshell, it comes down to this: If NeXT can earn >> enough money to cover R&D expenditures in an attempt to >> stay ahead of the competition over the next few years >> while also expanding in the software department, then >> they have a chance. Otherwise, the NeXT might turn into >> another Lisa... >> >Heavens, no, not that bad! Did anybody ever like those? At worst, it might >become another Amiga: highly respected in a niche, but discounted by the >mainstream. All NeXT really needs is a fine balance of foolishness: Another Lisa? You mean the predecessor to something far better, a computer ahead of its time? Perhaps...
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.