Re: How fast is that machine???

[Nathaniel Mishkin <mfci!mishkin%UUCP@YALE.ARPA>]

    In my opinion, the 3600 (or any other Lisp machine) beats the
    Apollo in all the other categories already, plus some you didn't
    mention.  For instance, the Apollo window package was apparently
    designed by chimpanzees.

First, let me say that I think the 3600 is a fine, fast, usable machine.
If you really need the cycles, and you really have the money (or get
a good enough deal), and you're willing to put up with the gross
language, strange but powerful environment, and lack of documentation,
then go for it.  But...

Amazingly enough, the 3600 lacks transcript windows and the ability
to conveniently edit and resubmit previous input.  I'm not sure how
much computing power I'd be willing to take for losing these features.
The 3600 window systems IS easier to program (i.e. write programs
that create and manipulate windows).  But is that your primary interest?
    
    However, it is probably true that a 3600 is inappropriate for
    text processing, and we would need some other hardware for that.
    
You know, the Apollo environment is actually fairly simple (sometimes
too simple) but even so, my observations have led me to believe, people
have had a hard to learning how to use the environment *effectively*.
Not only is the 3600 environment harder to learn, you are now also
suggesting that people will have to learn yet another environment
in order to do text processing.  Hmm.

       3.  How good is the software?  Does it support transparent
       remote file access?  Mail?  TeX?  Scribe?  Graphics?  Yale-style
       editors?  C?
    
    Yes to all but word processors and C.  As I said above, word
    processing would be done on Apollos or Apples.  

Is there right now real mail and remote file access to machines other
than Lisp machines?
    
                    -- Nat