[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

NeXT ...

   Date: Wed, 19 Oct 88 13:37 EDT
   From: miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU (Brad Miller)
   Sender: miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU
   Reply-To: miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU
   Organization: University of Rochester, Department of Computer Science
   Postal-Address: 610 CS Building, Comp Sci Dept., U. Rochester,
		   Rochester NY 14627
   Phone: 716-275-1118

       Date: Wed, 19 Oct 88 10:38:44 EDT
       From: buff%pravda@gatech.edu (Richard Billington)

       I don't suppose that Symbolics has any ideas about the
       three NuBus slots inside that black cube. Seeing as the
       NeXT comes with 8 Mb of memory already, Symbolics would
       have to add even less than they do for MacII. Also, the
       NuBus supposedly runs 2.5 times as fast as a MacII.

   Some side issues: it's an open question whether the NeXT really supports a
   nubus at all, since nubus is TTL and the NeXT bus is CMOS.

   Also note: their optical disk is WAY too slow for paging or swapping; adding
   real disk drives the cost up again to the point it may not be worth much
   over a Mac II or some impending 68030 machines. Also, their display uses

You seem to know quite a lot about the real performance of this
optical disk. Is it slower than the Jasmine used on the Mac Ivory?

   Postscript instead of X, implying lots of software just won't work;

This argument does not make sense. The Mac II does not use X either.

   Symbolics (and TI for that matter) have both announced they will be making
   their software X compatible, implying they would have to have a "machine
   dependant" version...

... for the Mac II

For now, I do not see any good reason why a MacIvory is a better thing
than a NeXTIvory... 

   Brad Miller		U. Rochester Comp Sci Dept.
   miller@cs.rochester.edu {...allegra!rochester!miller}