Feedback to Apple about MacOS and Rhapsody
bill coderre
Apple has set up a webpage discussion-board thingum that you can send
suggestions, complaints, and compliments to:
http://discuss.info.apple.com/macos/mainview.html
Why there? Because this board has an official Apple representative who is
paid to listen, respond, and carry your input back to management.
The general entry-point for the whole Tech Support Online organization is
this address:
http://support.info.apple.com/tso/tso-home.html
I suggest that those people who really want Rhapsody available on NuBus
PowerPC's send input there.
bc
--
This posting in no way represents the official opinion of Apple Computer,
Inc. Contact me at b...@wetware.com or b...@apple.com to discuss my personal
opinions and those of Apple Computer, Inc. Have A Nice Day.
Philippe Dambournet
I have just been to that page, and it is all but unusable due to confusing
authoring and server errors. As a result, it is nearly empty. How damn
unprofessional can you be at Apple, and still get away with it? How is
anyone going to take Apple seriously if they cannot execute correctly using
their own tools?
=========================================================
Philippe Dambournet * phil...@worldnet.att.net * Comp...@compuserve.com
=========================================================
In article <bc-ya02408000R1...@news.apple.com>, b...@apple.com
Jack Howarth
>In article <bc-ya02408000R1...@news.apple.com>, b...@apple.com
>(bill coderre) wrote:
>
>Apple has set up a webpage discussion-board thingum that you can send
>suggestions, complaints, and compliments to:
>
>http://discuss.info.apple.com/macos/mainview.html
>
>Why there? Because this board has an official Apple representative who is
>paid to listen, respond, and carry your input back to management.
>
>The general entry-point for the whole Tech Support Online organization is
>this address:
>
>http://support.info.apple.com/tso/tso-home.html
>
>I suggest that those people who really want Rhapsody available on NuBus
>PowerPC's send input there.
>
>bc
>--
>This posting in no way represents the official opinion of Apple Computer,
>Inc. Contact me at b...@wetware.com or b...@apple.com to discuss my personal
>opinions and those of Apple Computer, Inc. Have A Nice Day.
Sorry Bill. I wasted a half an hour composing a note for the above mentioned
message board only to find that the server is buggy and there is only a single
user message there because of it. Typically Apple. I think it is better for this
discussion to remain here in comp.sys.mac.system in broad view for everyone to
see rather than squirreled away on some company message board. Also I doubt
Gil and Ellen will be able to ignore these threads after awhile. There are a lot
of Nubus PowerMac owners left who haven't posted their thoughts here!
Jack
--
Jack W. Howarth, Ph.D. 231 Bethesda Avenue
NMR Facility Director Cincinnati, Ohio 45211
Dept. of Molecular Genetics phone: (513) 558-4418
Univ. of Cincinnati College of Medicine fax: (513) 558-8474
Lawson English
>Also I doubt Gil and Ellen will be able to ignore these threads after
awhile. There are a >lot of Nubus PowerMac owners left who haven't posted
their thoughts here!
> Jack
Thanks for saving me the trouble. Consider us filing papers to protect our
rights as owners of Nubus Power Macs. All the ranting in this forum is pale
to using up Gil and Ellen's salary in legal defense fees.
BTW, seeing your discipline, my architecture practice pioneered
free-standing medical diagnostic and treatment centers with MRI in southern
California years ago.
- Paul
---------------------------------------------------
Apple is a company, but Macintosh is a community. -S.M. King >I think all
of us coined it<
---------------------------------------------------
J. Paul Lindblad
>Also I doubt Gil and Ellen will be able to ignore these threads after
awhile. There are a >lot of Nubus PowerMac owners left who haven't posted
their thoughts here!
> Jack
My second posting due to uneplained difficulties with Apple's Cyberdog
mailing system:
Sorry, Lawson - I didn't intend to impersonate you!
Thanks for saving me the trouble. Consider us filing papers to protect our
rights as owners of Nubus Power Macs. All the ranting in this forum is pale
to using up Gil and Ellen's salary in legal defense fees.
BTW, seeing your discipline, my architecture practice pioneered
free-standing medical diagnostic and treatment centers with MRI in southern
California years ago.
- Paul <sear...@concentric.net>
Andrew Brownsword
In article <AEFD791...@206.173.240.191>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >Also I doubt Gil and Ellen will be able to ignore these threads after
> awhile. There are a >lot of Nubus PowerMac owners left who haven't posted
> their thoughts here!
> > Jack
>
> Thanks for saving me the trouble. Consider us filing papers to protect our
> rights as owners of Nubus Power Macs. All the ranting in this forum is pale
> to using up Gil and Ellen's salary in legal defense fees.
>
C'mon people, don't you think Apple has enough problems without you suing
them for being smart? Look, they need a new OS and everyone agrees they
need it yesterday. So they've laid out a very aggressive but believable
schedule to deliver it. To do this they've had to cut a few corners, one
of which is to reduce the legacy support that killed the Copland project.
Supporting NuBus takes time and resources that are needed to get the thing
out the door.
And just because version 1 or 2 of Rhapsody doesn't support NuBus, it
doesn't mean they can't add it later when the pressure is off a bit. As
some consolation you will have System 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9 to run on your
NuBus PPC, and those systems will be progressive more and more PPC native.
--
Andrew Brownsword
Software Engineer
Electronic Arts (Canada), Inc.
"All opinions here in are mine and don't necessarily reflect those of my employer."
Jack Howarth
> And just because version 1 or 2 of Rhapsody doesn't support NuBus, it
>doesn't mean they can't add it later when the pressure is off a bit. As
>some consolation you will have System 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9 to run on your
>NuBus PPC, and those systems will be progressive more and more PPC native.
>
Well lets see...if you start playing into the idea that it would be okay to wait
until the 3rd or 4th release of Rhapsody for Nubus Powermac support you also
immediately play into to the hands of those who would rather never add the
support. They will say 'look you won't have Rhapsody until late 1998 at the
earliest so your machine will be rather old by then' and they will be right!
If Apple doesn't support Nubus Powermacs by the first customer release in
late 1997/early 1998 you can kiss any support good-bye. To some degree
it is the same logic used for not supporting 68K machines under OpenStep...its
dead-end hardware since no one is making 68K machines anymore. The same applies
to Nubus Powermac owners to some degree. The longer Apple can string us out, the
less heat they will take should they change their minds and never deliver Rhapsody
on a Nubus Powermac.
Jack Howarth
And just because version 1 or 2 of Rhapsody doesn't support NuBus, it
>doesn't mean they can't add it later when the pressure is off a bit. As
>some consolation you will have System 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9 to run on your
>NuBus PPC, and those systems will be progressive more and more PPC native.
>
Don't you think if rewriting the rest of the original System software into
native form was easy that Apple would have done it by now? I really doubt
you will see much legacy code converted over. They will spend most of their
efforts trying to seed new technologies like Java, JavaBeans and OpenDoc
on the System 7.x. With the huge task of Rhapsody ahead of them coupled with the
brain drain in programming talent they have suffered in the last few years
they will be sorely pressed to get Rhapsody done. Never mind rewriting
the legacy code in the old MacOS into native form. Why bother anyway because
the old OS is sick to the core. The current file manager is a disaster with
4 or 5 layers of code on it. They really do need to start over fresh with
OpenStep and scrap the existing Mac APIs. The question is whether Nubus PPC
owners will ever see the 'promised land' of Rhapsody. If we don't then to
a person every Nubus Powermac owner will have to ask themselves 'is
buying a Wintel to run NT that bad compared to upgrading to run Rhapsody'.
Michael Eilers
In article <howarth-ya0240800...@news.ececs.uc.edu>,
how...@nitro.med.uc.edu (Jack Howarth) wrote:
late 1997/early 1998 you can kiss any support good-bye. To some degree
> it is the same logic used for not supporting 68K machines under OpenStep...its
> dead-end hardware since no one is making 68K machines anymore. The same
applies
> to Nubus Powermac owners to some degree. The longer Apple can string us
out, the
> less heat they will take should they change their minds and never
deliver Rhapsody
> on a Nubus Powermac.
I'm sorry for asking a very simplistic question, but... so what?
Considering the tremendous hardware requirements of Windows NT (you'd
better have a P150, 32 megs of RAM and 2 gigs, and that's just to get it
running) I think that obsoleting older systems in favor of a modern OS is
a fairly common trend in computing today. By the time Rhapsody comes out,
most of the NuBus macs will be a minimum of 3 years old--the idea of
running NT (or even 95) on a 3-year old machine makes me shudder! NuBus
users will have 7.7 to play with, and when they upgrade their machines in
98 they will get a brand new OS to boot.
There are no more NuBus machines. There are no more 68K machines. These
things are dead--blotto--history--stone-age. The people who really need
and will use a modern OS have already moved on.
michael
Dave L.
how...@nitro.med.uc.edu (Jack Howarth) wrote:
>If we don't then to
> a person every Nubus Powermac owner will have to ask themselves 'is
> buying a Wintel to run NT that bad compared to upgrading to run Rhapsody'.
Actually, you are one of only two people (or maybe three?) that I have seen
ask this question. I think that most Mac users would want to stay with
Apple. If you have to buy new hardware anyway, why buy wintel? So you can
run WinNT? I'm sorry, but so far, Rhapsody sound* much more exciting than
WinNT. Only time will tell of course, but if everything goes as planned,
then Rhapsody is going to be very exciting.
--
________________
David Lewis
lew...@tuns.ca
www.tuns.ca/~lewisda
Jack Howarth
>I'm sorry for asking a very simplistic question, but... so what?
>Considering the tremendous hardware requirements of Windows NT (you'd
>better have a P150, 32 megs of RAM and 2 gigs, and that's just to get it
>running) I think that obsoleting older systems in favor of a modern OS is
>a fairly common trend in computing today. By the time Rhapsody comes out,
>most of the NuBus macs will be a minimum of 3 years old--the idea of
>running NT (or even 95) on a 3-year old machine makes me shudder! NuBus
>users will have 7.7 to play with, and when they upgrade their machines in
>98 they will get a brand new OS to boot.
>
>There are no more NuBus machines. There are no more 68K machines. These
>things are dead--blotto--history--stone-age. The people who really need
>and will use a modern OS have already moved on.
>
>michael
I would suggest you look again. Windows NT has dropped the amount for memory needed
from around 24 Mb for v3.51 to 16 Mb for v4.0. In the meanwhile almost every Wintel
sold now has 16 Mb. Apple owners have to quit living in the past and look at what the
market is like right now and will be in the next year. As to processor speed, I have used
(hell I installed myself) NT 4.0 on a high-end 486 at work and it was quite usable running
MS Office. This machine only had 16 Mb as well. Granted NT's VM tends to thrash the drive
a bit it still is okay for productivity work.
Jack
ps The idea of buying a new computer every 3 years is what makes me shudder. The Nubus
Powermacs have a 64-bit data bus running as fast as 40 MHz (which is within spitting distance
of anything on the Mac now). This crap people are spewing about the first generation Powermacs
being decrepit is ridiculous. This will be a real problem for Apple. The bleeding edge folk with money
to burn are willing to let Apple write off the Nubus PPCs for the 'greater good'. It's no wonder
market share is down from 8% to 5%. The business world does not write off equipment in 3 years.
Russ Jacobson
> ps The idea of buying a new computer every 3 years is what makes me
shudder. The Nubus
> Powermacs have a 64-bit data bus running as fast as 40 MHz (which is
within spitting distance
> of anything on the Mac now). This crap people are spewing about the
first generation Powermacs
> being decrepit is ridiculous. This will be a real problem for Apple. The
bleeding edge folk with money
> to burn are willing to let Apple write off the Nubus PPCs for the
'greater good'. It's no wonder
> market share is down from 8% to 5%. The business world does not write
off equipment in 3 years.
>
That is precisely the issue here. While for awhile I have tried to be
leading edge my own personal changes in finances (no more big salary
upgrades for state employees its a new world in that area) I am now trying
to keep my computer going (and current in software) for another 5 years or
more if possible. heck that is what I do with my cars -- I am not lucky to
have scads of $ to upgrade cars every couple years either.
And forget just about me, what about the education market? All those
public schools Apple courted for years and years. They are a big part of
Mac commmunity. I know lots of schools here in town (and teacher) who have
computer labs with all generations of Macs conceivable. And for most of
their machines for last couple years they all run essentially the same
stuff more of less. But now this change really out dates them. And they do
have some powermacs (many NUBUS) so even those machines are going to be
outdated. They too cannot afford to always be on cutting edge --- you know
how funding for public schools goes!!! I agree with you here, all this
talk about outdated in a few years is plain snobbish in the view of those
of us who are not blessed fiancially to always do this. I have never liked
this aspect of the computer market in some ways because it is hard to
always afford being on cutting edge. Yet being on cutting edge is
important as new things computers can do (because of OS and software
capabliity--and hardware too) does allow user to do things he/she never
imagined before. Who would have thought of what we are now using internet
for (ie WEB!)
Myself as I looked at my situtation I found that my own plans to make
another upgrade in hardware were probably no longer affordable as my
finances changed. So a month ago I finally bumped by 7100/66 from 8 megs
and 32k virtual to 40 megs of real ram with the cheap prices. I really
hoped by this my system would be good for many mroe years in terms of its
usability in new software upgrades and capablities. But now I wonder? Will
the new ideas only run on the new OS, willl any one bother to continue to
program for us system 7 people? That is what bothers me as it now appears
my own system may not stay current in terms of what new stuff will be made
for it!
Russ Jacobson
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Russ Jacobson INTERNET:jaco...@geoserv.isgs.uiuc.edu
222 NRB, 615 E Peabody 217-244-2426 Home Phone: 217-384-6983
Illinois Geological Survey DINOSAUR RUSS: who lives, eats,
Champaign, IL 61820 breathes and smells dinosaurs!!!
Keeper of DINO RUSS's LAIR at http://128.174.172.76/isgsroot/dinos/dinos_home.html
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
____
___ .-~. /_"-._
`-._~-. / /_ "~o\ :Y
\ \ / : \~x. ` ')
] Y / | Y< ~-.__j
/ ! _.--~T : l l< /.-~
/ / ____.--~ . ` l /~\ \<|Y
/ / .-~~" /| . ',-~\ \L|
/ / / .^ \ Y~Y \.^>/l_ "--'
/ Y .-"( . l__ j_j l_/ /~_.-~ .
Y l / \ ) ~~~." / `/"~ / \.__/l_
| \ _.-" ~-{__ l : l._Z~-.___.--~
| ~---~ / ~~"---\_ ' __[>
l . _.^ ___ _>-y~
\ \ . .-~ .-~ ~>--" /
\ ~---" / ./ _.-'
"-.,_____.,_ _.--~\ _.-~
~~ ( _} -Row
`. ~(
) \
/,`--'~\--'~\
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary W. Longsine
In <howarth-ya0240800...@news.ececs.uc.edu> Jack
Howarth wrote:
[munch [sw...@mindlink.net (Andrew Brownsword) ]]
[munch otherComments]
> With the huge task of Rhapsody ahead of them coupled with the
> brain drain in programming talent they have suffered in the last
few years
> they will be sorely pressed to get Rhapsody done. Never mind
rewriting
> the legacy code in the old MacOS into native form.
You're forgetting that Rhapsody will be developed by the tremendous
brain influx they just received from acquiring NeXT. The project
will be headed by Avie Tevenian, a NeXT VP and head OS engineer, and
his team will include about 100 NeXT engineers and 50 Apple
engineers.
For those with the tiniest bit of foresight, Developer copies of
Rhapsody are already shipping -- it's called OpenStep, and is
currently available on Intel, Sparc, and NeXT (m68k) hardware.
Applications developed to the OpenStep API will probably require
little effort to recompile and debug for Rhapsody.
> Why bother anyway because
> the old OS is sick to the core. The current file manager is a
disaster with
> 4 or 5 layers of code on it. They really do need to start over
fresh with
> OpenStep and scrap the existing Mac APIs.
Here! Here!
> The question is whether Nubus PPC
> owners will ever see the 'promised land' of Rhapsody. If we don't
then to
> a person every Nubus Powermac owner will have to ask themselves 'is
> buying a Wintel to run NT that bad compared to upgrading to run
Rhapsody'.
It is very likely that NuBus will be supported, when Rhapsody ships
as GA. This is not a technical obstacle, only a time/resource
commitment. If there are really millions of these machines out there
(as people claim) Apple really cannot afford to let them continue
running System 7 after Rhapsody ships.
/gary
--
Gary W. Longsine, Systems Engineer | ____/|
PLATINUM Technologies, Inc. | \ o.O| "The meek shall
long...@platinum.com (NeXTmail | =(_)= inherit nothin'."
(612) 688-3033 x7814 & MIME) |. U - Frank Zappa
Ken Schrock
Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
<lewisda-ya0235800...@news.dal.ca>...
> I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
--
Ken Schrock
ke...@cannet.com
Joshua W. Burton
eil...@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu (Michael Eilers) wrote:
> Considering the tremendous hardware requirements of Windows NT
> (you'd better have a P150, 32 megs of RAM and 2 gigs, and that's
> just to get it running) I think that obsoleting older systems in
> favor of a modern OS is a fairly common trend in computing today.
> By the time Rhapsody comes out, most of the NuBus macs will be
> a minimum of 3 years old--the idea of running NT (or even 95) on
> a 3-year old machine makes me shudder! NuBus users will have 7.7
> to play with, and when they upgrade their machines in 98 they
> will get a brand new OS to boot.
I really do hate to be smug, but we've been crying in the wilderness
for so long that I just can't resist. This NeXT cube in front of me
arrived in the fall of 1989, when SE/30's and IIx's were the dream
machines in the Mac world, fat (512 kB) original Macs were still
common, and in the PeeCee world fast clone 386's were finally gaining
dominance over the old AT's. I grimly paid an extra $2k for a 350 MB
hard disk, because the 230 MB MO drive was just a bit too slow for a
primary storage and swapping medium. A year later, when it became
available, I paid $700 to upgrade from an '030 to an '040 processor.
In other words, for $8,700 academic, I got a machine that has now
been in heavy use for about 7 1/2 years. And, thanks to a fast but
nonstandard NuBus variant, 12 DMA channels, a superbly overdesigned
keyboard and multimedia monitor (we didn't call it that back when
the Mac just had a beep, of course), and an operating system so good
that you're only now begging for it, you know what? I'm still pretty
content with my old box. I did upgrade the memory from 8 MB to 64 a
while ago (did I mention that memory was $250/MB when I bought it?)
and I've installed a big hard drive and am thinking of putting a Jaz
or SyJet on the SCSI chain---the MO drive is finally flaking out on
me, after most of a decade of yeoman service. But I've seen the
pathetic excuse for window-dragging that goes on with a big graphics
file on a supposedly-screaming PowerPC. Maybe it's the Display
Postscript, or the fast filesystem, or the custom DMA silicon and
video interface. But my creaky old 25 MHz Moto 68040 is still throwing
pixels with the best of them. I figure I'll take a good look at the
new Macs, sometime late in 1998. If I like what I see, I may just
upgrade my cube less than a decade after I bought it.
At a machine every three years, even with future-value discounting,
I would have had about $3100 to spend on each computer. In 1989, I
don't think I could have bought a monitor like this one for that.
We think of our age as the age of all ages |=============================
When Man has grown modern at last. | Joshua Burton (847)677-3902
But what other page among History's pages | jbu...@nwu.edu
Was so overburdened with past? -- Piet Hein |=============================
Dave L.
"Ken Schrock" <ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
> Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
> > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
>
> Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
That's easy... fear mongering.
Mike Zulauf
> C'mon people, don't you think Apple has enough problems without you suing
> them for being smart?
Being smart is pissing off some of your most loyal customers? People who
bought the NuBus PowerMacs supported Apple in the transition to PPC. Now
Apple is considering dumping them. Doesn't sound so smart to me.
> Look, they need a new OS and everyone agrees they
> need it yesterday. So they've laid out a very aggressive but believable
> schedule to deliver it. To do this they've had to cut a few corners, one
> of which is to reduce the legacy support that killed the Copland project.
> Supporting NuBus takes time and resources that are needed to get the thing
> out the door.
Fine, but then they better be aware that _many_ of us won't be happy. And
not being happy tends to push people to do strange things. These things
may include lawsuits, switching to a different platform, etc.
> And just because version 1 or 2 of Rhapsody doesn't support NuBus, it
> doesn't mean they can't add it later when the pressure is off a bit. As
> some consolation you will have System 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9 to run on your
> NuBus PPC, and those systems will be progressive more and more PPC native.
If Apple is going to support NuBus PowerMacs, as was promised, then they
better say so soon, before the shit hits the fan. As for System 7, it's a
dog that should have been shot years ago. It will never offer the
benefits of a modern OS.
If we have to buy a new machine to get a modern OS, we'll do so, only lots
of us won't be buying a MacOS machine.
Mike
--
Mike Zulauf
mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu
Dave L.
mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu (Mike Zulauf) wrote:
> If we have to buy a new machine to get a modern OS, we'll do so...
As in WindowsNT? Give me a break. I would rather use System7.
Mike Zulauf
In article <lewisda-ya0235800...@news.dal.ca>,
lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY (Dave L.) wrote:
> Actually, you are one of only two people (or maybe three?) that I have seen
> ask this question. I think that most Mac users would want to stay with
> Apple.
While I haven't been keeping score, you can rest assured that there are
significantly more than two or three of us complaining about these
developments. As for wanting to stay with Apple, that is what we want as
well - but only if Apple doesn't make it too difficult for us.
> If you have to buy new hardware anyway, why buy wintel? So you can
> run WinNT?
I won't buy a machine that has shown itself to be as supremely unreliable
as Apple has become. It's a matter of not rewarding unacceptable behavior
and also protecting my own ass.
> I'm sorry, but so far, Rhapsody sound* much more exciting than
> WinNT. Only time will tell of course, but if everything goes as planned,
> then Rhapsody is going to be very exciting.
Apple always comes up with exciting sounding stuff - only rarely do they
carry through with it. Besides, NT is here now, and is steadily
improving. All Apple OS's past System 7 have been stuck in the vapor
stage for many years.
William Raphael Hix
Ken Schrock (ke...@cannet.com) wrote:
: Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
I think that most Mac users will stay with Apple as long as Apple stays
with them. That is to say, as long as Mac users "investment" in Apple,
in hardware and software costs and especially in user experience, is
maintained by Apple, Mac users will stay with the MacOS. This means
Apple should work hard to make Rhapsody run on every Mac with a PPC on
the motherboard. They should make the software emulation in Rhapsody as
complete and bullet proof as possible. This also means that default
appearance manager setting should work like Sys 7. Of course they could
do all of this, and still die from a lack of developer support.
:
: Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
The number of Mac users is in fact growing. However since this group is
growing at a rate slower than the rate of growth for total computer users,
the market share (the percentage of the total) is declining.
Raph
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Raphael Hix Department of Astronomy
ra...@astro.as.utexas.edu University of Texas
Voice: (512) 471-3412 R.L. Moore Hall
FAX: (512) 471-6016 Austin TX 78712
WWW: http://tycho.as.utexas.edu/~raph Room 17.210
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nicolas Tamburri Sun - Design Technology and Verification
b...@apple.com (bill coderre) writes:
> Apple has set up a webpage discussion-board thingum that you can send
> suggestions, complaints, and compliments to:
>
> http://discuss.info.apple.com/macos/mainview.html
>
> Why there? Because this board has an official Apple representative who is
> paid to listen, respond, and carry your input back to management.
Sorry Bill, but this is where the discussion is taking place. Apple
could have saved the money spent setting up a web-site and paid the
"official Apple representative" the same money to monitor the already
existing discussion venues.
Given the fear that has swept through the NuBus community, (rightly
IMO, given the vagueness of Apple's press release,) it would be even better
if someone that can speak for Apple could throw us a bread crust of
hope and tell us our fears are unfounded. Apple's silence only feeds
our fears, and if the silence really does signal that Apple is not
going to support the NuBus PPC, then let it, and us, face the music
now, rather than keep us in the dark. It is the least Apple can do
for a very loyal customer base.
Don't take this as a personal slam, Bill. I appreciate your posts and
recognize you tread a thin tightrope between writing encouragement and
losing your job. You should not be in that position. Apple should be
addressing our issues in an *unambiguous* and official manner, whether it
is what we want to hear or not.
For the Record: Given what I know to be NeXTSTEP's pedigree, I think
NuBus support comes practically free, even on 68K Macs if they choose
to support them. Given that NeXTSTEP runs on diverse hardware already,
I believe that not supporting anything but a PCI PPC based Macs is
strictly political, rather than technical. (Surely it cannot be easier
to support an EISA Intel motherboard than a NuBus Apple motherboard.) If
Apple chooses to stop supporting NuBus Macs then that is a real lost
revenue opportunity for Apple. There are an awful lot of us who would
shell out $100 for the upgrade, and subsequent upgrades after
that. Support for NuBus Macs would also renew a lot of trust in Apple
by a lot of disaffected people. As it stands now, why should anyone
believe that Rhapsody "will run on all currently shipping Macintosh
models and the future CHRP platform"? Because Apple promises so?
Don't make me laugh.
Support for us now is an investment in our buying future Mac hardware.
Abandonement is a 2 way street; There are a lot of customers who will
never buy another Apple product again. I currently own a Newton, a
Powerbook, a Q650 recently upgraded to a 7100/80, and NO PCs. It
saddens me to say it, but I will probably be among them.
/nt
PS: Feel free to forward this to the official rep.
--
\ My opinions do not represent those of Sun Microsystems Inc.
\ Work: tamb...@suneast.east.sun.com || Home: tamb...@tiac.net
Kevin Pompei
In article <5bbsd7$2...@news.platinum.com>, long...@platinum.com spouts
forth...
> For those with the tiniest bit of foresight, Developer copies of
> Rhapsody are already shipping -- it's called OpenStep, and is
> currently available on Intel, Sparc, and NeXT (m68k) hardware.
> Applications developed to the OpenStep API will probably require
> little effort to recompile and debug for Rhapsody.
>
This is exactly what Steve Jobs repeated several times at MacWorld. In
fact, I think it demonstrates that "Rhapsody" will not be very different
than NEXTSTEP.
Kevin Pompei
Former Mac user, former NeXT user, current NT user, who can't wait for
"Rhapsody" on PowerPC hardware.
Jack Howarth
>You're forgetting that Rhapsody will be developed by the tremendous
>brain influx they just received from acquiring NeXT. The project
>will be headed by Avie Tevenian, a NeXT VP and head OS engineer, and
>his team will include about 100 NeXT engineers and 50 Apple
>engineers.
>
And if you read the interview with Tevenian carefully NeXT is continuing all
their existing product development and releases. It shall be very interesting
to see how NeXT (a company who because of low profits I doubt maintains
excess programming staff) manages to juggle all their previous work and
the Mac port at the same time. I also find it very telling that Apple has so
little to bring to the table that they are only a third of the programming team.
Jack
Mike Zulauf
> "Ken Schrock" <ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
>
> > Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
> > > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
> >
> > Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
>
> That's easy... fear mongering.
I'll agree with that in part. But a large part is Apple's own fault. By
this I mean the endless delays in bringing out a modern OS, broken
promises, technology dead ends. Many people are perceiving (rightly in my
opinion) that the many advantages that the Mac once had are diminishing.
It is no longer clear cut who has the best system.
Garance A Drosehn
"Ken Schrock" <ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
>
> > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
>
> Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
Because there are more *new* people coming into the market,
and the majority of them go for Intel-based PC's.
---
Garance Alistair Drosehn = g...@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer (MIME & NeXTmail capable)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy NY USA
J. Paul Lindblad
>> If we have to buy a new machine to get a modern OS, we'll do so...
>
>As in WindowsNT? Give me a break. I would rather use System7.
>
>--
>________________
>David Lewis
>lew...@tuns.ca
>www.tuns.ca/~lewisda
>
David, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
We Nubus PowerMac Apple loyalists from the 128 days shall not be neglected,
ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
Certainly other platforms will be more than inviting.
Arman Afagh
In article <01bc00ea$bbd5f5c0$57f612c7@schrock3>, "Ken Schrock"
<ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
>Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
><lewisda-ya0235800...@news.dal.ca>...
>
>> I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
>
>Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
Ken,
It's because most current consumer computer buyers are buying a computer
for the first time. And when they go into store X, they're going to see 20
new wintel machines and 4 new Macs. They use Wintel at work, whatever.
They're more likely to buy Wintel. So, although most (almost all?) Mac
users continue to buy Macintoshes when they upgrade (I myself am on my
third, and have no desire to buy anything but Mac), so many more *clueless*
newbies are buying Wintel that the Apple market share is proportionately
less, even though in numbers, more Mac OS machines may be being sold than
at any time before.
ARman.
\\\|///
\\ - - //
( @ @ )
+-----------------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo----------------------+
| Arman Afagh New York University |
| afag...@popmail.med.nyu.edu School of Medicine |
| http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~aafagh Class of 1999 |
| |
| "Intel Inside": |
| The world's most widely used warning label. |
+--------------------------------Oooo----------------------+
oooO ( )
( ) ) /
\ ( (_/
\_)
Tom Hageman
>ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
>you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
That's the true American spirit! (litigate! litigate! litigate!)
(liberally apply :-) for the sarcasm impaired...)
Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
support all current hardware.
--
__/__/__/__/ Tom Hageman <t...@basil.icce.rug.nl> [NeXTmail/Mime OK]
__/ __/_/ IC Group <t...@icgned.nl> (work)
__/__/__/ "Ed is the standard text editor"
__/ _/_/ -- Unix Programmer's Manual
Mike Zulauf
> mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu (Mike Zulauf) wrote:
>
> > If we have to buy a new machine to get a modern OS, we'll do so...
>
> As in WindowsNT? Give me a break. I would rather use System7.
Well then you're welcome to it. I'll agree that NT 4 isn't as
esthetically nice in many ways, but it's much better than it was, and has
many significant advantages over System 7.
J. Paul Lindblad
>>We Nubus PowerMac Apple loyalists from the 128 days shall not be
neglected,
>>ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
>>you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
>
>That's the true American spirit! (litigate! litigate! litigate!)
>
>(liberally apply :-) for the sarcasm impaired...)
>
>Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
Apple stopped shipping NuBus PowerMacs - opting to go for the more economic
PCI slot machines.
Prior to sending email, remove '.REMOVEthisToRespond' in the From field.
Jack Howarth
>Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
>support all current hardware.
>
That is all currently shipping hardware, not all currently existing hardware!
It is by no means clear that Nubus Powermacs will be supported and I believe
in the absence of a huge outcry from the Mac community Apple will try to
put them out to pasture on System 7.x.
J. Paul Lindblad
>I believe in the absence of a huge outcry from the Mac community Apple
will try to
> Jack
I'm observing the growing number of related NewsGroups we in these related
threads are broadcasting to - and the growing number of lengthening,
related threads in this NewsGroup. It won't be long until most of this
group's threads go to the issue of Apple's unbridled abandonment of her
core loyalist who helped establish the Macintosh paradigm in 1984 and those
of us more recently from the first generation of PowerMac owners.
Apple, sit up and be on notice: We_are_organizing a class-action resistance
to your back-handedness!
Remember to Boycott 7.6.
- Paul
Homer Simpson
> David, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
>
> We Nubus PowerMac Apple loyalists from the 128 days shall not be neglected,
> ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
> you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
>
> Certainly other platforms will be more than inviting.
On what grounds are you claiming to file this suite? Do you have it in
writing that your machine will run "Rapsady"? You are beginning to sound
like those people who file suits against McDonalds for being too stupid to
realize that Coffee is made from boiling water thus if you spill it you
will get burnt.
My guess is that you will see this new OS for NuBus PPC machines available
after the initial release. Which means that by the time it is ready the
blue box should be inplace and you won't have to update all of your
software immediately.
I think that in May there will be some real road maps made explaining all
of the Unkowns. My fear is that this new os will be nothing more than
OpenStep repackaged. This does not excite me at all. What's new, what's
exciting about it? It's UNIX for crying outloud with a pretty interface. If
you want all of these great things run mkLinux, that is currently availble
for NuBus PPCs and offers preemptive multitasking and memory protection.
Almost as many applications as shipping in Openstep if you factor in all of
the gnu tools.
I had hoped for a truely modern os that would take advantage of
improvements made to memory management, files systems and distributed
symetric multiprocessing that have been discussed in Computer Science over
the last decade. Instead we are getting the same basic design that System
Vr4 gave us with some things fixed and a nice facade to a command line
interface along with 2.5 Mach kernel which is about 7 or 8 years old now. I
won't even begin to discuss the security issues that unix can present.
NeXT has done a fine job of hiding most of UNIX with its appKits and its
Objective C usage but it is still Unix under the hood.
Tony M. Carr
> "Ken Schrock" <ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
>
> > Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
> > > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
> >
> > Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
>
> That's easy... fear mongering.
>
Or the Wintel side is growing faster than the Mac side. IE if the total
number of Macs increase 5% and the PCs increase 8%, the Mac's percentage of
the total would decrease. I'm sure the total number of Macs is use
increased.
Tony C.
--
Tony M. Carr
Veteran of the Psychic War
Dave L.
Garance A Drosehn <g...@eclipse.its.rpi.edu> wrote:
> "Ken Schrock" <ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
> >
> > Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
>
> Because there are more *new* people coming into the market,
> and the majority of them go for Intel-based PC's.
I honestly think that a lot of it has to do with fear mongering and
propaganda. If the media says that Apple is dead enough times, then it will
eventually become a reality... a self-fulfilling prophesy. Likewise, if the
media tells people enough times that Bill Gates, the biggest geek that ever
lived, is a cyber-god who was sent to earth to guide us all into the brave
new electronic frontier, then people will believe that too. The Mac is
still far superior to a Win95 machine but all we hear about in the media is
"Apple is dead" and Apple has made no attempt to refute those claims. It's
called *propeganda* and *fear mongering*. Apple has to come up with an
aggresive hard hitting marketing campaign to get the truth out. I'm sick to
death of this pathetic sacarine coated Hallmark-style "give your dreams a
chance" Performa crap!!!!!
Mike Zulauf
> In article <E40EA...@icgned.nl>, t...@icgned.nl (Tom Hageman) wrote:
>
> >Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
> >support all current hardware.
> >
>
> That is all currently shipping hardware, not all currently existing hardware!
> It is by no means clear that Nubus Powermacs will be supported and I believe
> in the absence of a huge outcry from the Mac community Apple will try to
> put them out to pasture on System 7.x.
By the way, take a look at this. Apple promises support for NuBus PowerMacs!
From MacWorld November 95 p 41.
Apple Hedges its OS Bets.
"Apple has decided not to make Copland run on 680x0 Macs, with or without
PowerPC upgrade cards. The new OS will run only on systems with
Applem, Radius, Power Computing, and DayStar that have a PowerPC on the
motherboard, according to Vito Salvaggio, Apple's group product marketing
manager for Copland. Users of the 680x0 systems will be offered a
userinterface replacement that provides most of the interface enhancements
being planned for Copland, such as multiple modes (for beginners and
advanced users), active assistants that help automate takes, and a
customizable desktop (see Macworld July 1995). The interface will also
include updated networking software to maintain compatibility with
PowerPC-based Macs running Copland. (PowerPC upgrades will not be
compatible with Copland because the OS will require certain controllers
found only on Power Mac and clone motherboards, Salvaggio says."
"While Apple has never committed to porting Copland to 680x0 Macs, earlier
this year officials said a 680x0 port of Copland was likely six or so
months after the Power Mac version was completed. However, the 680x0 does
not have the processing power need to support Copland's core architectural
improvements, ... and Apple decided to port just the interface and basic
interoperability components to 680x0. Mac buyers will have about a year to
switch to Power Macs if they want the full advantage of Copland."
I'm sure that this wasn't the first instance where Apple said that Copland
would run on NuBus PowerMacs - just the earliest that I've dug up so far.
Mike Zulauf
In article <eilersm-1201...@192.0.2.1>,
eil...@aruba.ccit.arizona.edu (Michael Eilers) wrote:
> Considering the tremendous hardware requirements of Windows NT (you'd
> better have a P150, 32 megs of RAM and 2 gigs, and that's just to get it
> running)
Not from my experience at all! I've used NT quite a bit. I've seen it
working quite nicely on 486 machines.
> There are no more NuBus machines. There are no more 68K machines. These
> things are dead--blotto--history--stone-age. The people who really need
> and will use a modern OS have already moved on.
There are no more NuBus machines??? What the hell am I typing on?
It is perfectly capable of running a modern OS. It's just that the people
responsible for providing such an OS are balking.
Zxeses
In article <01bc00ea$bbd5f5c0$57f612c7@schrock3>, "Ken Schrock"
<ke...@cannet.com> wrote:
> Dave L. <lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY> wrote in article
> <lewisda-ya0235800...@news.dal.ca>...
>
> > I think that most Mac users would want to stay with Apple.
>
> Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
>
> --
> Ken Schrock
> ke...@cannet.com
The computer industry is a funny place. Think about it this way, Apple
Mac's used to represent 10-15% of the computers, then the PC sales picked
up and new computers were sold to people who didn't have computers before.
Apple keeps 96-98% of their users. The problem comes in that the growth
rate is probably around 4-6% also, so it' s a wash.
In other words, there are no MORE Apple Sales, but no less either. The
computer industry is growing, therefore apple's "share" of this pie keeps
getting smaller, but not so many less buyers/users.
Make sense? Good! cause I almost forgot why I was writing this! :)
So his point, that most Mac users stay with Mac's, is true still. I will
always use a Mac, even if the company goes under, when I can't use my Mac
any more, I will toss it out and never use a computer again..
--
Zxe...@zapcom.net <- Note: This may be different then what is in the
header, please use this.
Michael Alfonso Visconti
Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.system: 15-Jan-97 Re: Feedback to
Apple about.. by Mike Zul...@atmos.met.ut
> I'm sure that this wasn't the first instance where Apple said that Copland
> would run on NuBus PowerMacs - just the earliest that I've dug up so far.
>
> Mike
>
is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
Richard C. Logan
In article <AEFFE2E...@206.173.240.224>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >> If we have to buy a new machine to get a modern OS, we'll do so...
> >
> >As in WindowsNT? Give me a break. I would rather use System7.
> >
> >--
> >________________
> >David Lewis
> >lew...@tuns.ca
> >www.tuns.ca/~lewisda
> >
>
> David, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
>
> We Nubus PowerMac Apple loyalists from the 128 days shall not be neglected,
> ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
> you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
>
> Certainly other platforms will be more than inviting.
I could not help but notice the negative spin in the media that has been
haunting Apple for sometime. These incessant attacks are undoubtedly
effecting Apples market share and survivability in general. Uniformed
people pick up on these press angles and treat them as fact. It seems that
there has hardly been a time when the Macintosh has not been under fire.
The first time I saw a Mac it was a revelation to me and I knew little or
next to nothing about computers yet I intuited what the interface meant
and the implications of its sublime logic.
I Have been a MacUser since 1984 and have had to live with all the
disinformation and hostility towards the Mac. For along time everyone said
that a character based interface was the best way to go and one didn't
want to have to take their hands off the keyboard, while all the time
Microsoft was leveraging the Macintosh i.e. "Excel"to get a foothold in
the applications market and working on Windows.
Now is not the time to gather together and slit our throats for the media
with lawsuits over the uncertain future of Nubus PowerMacs. If Apple falls
then we will be consigned to the mediocrity of the Microsoft hegemony and
a single vendor for a mainstream OS. That may be fine for buisness people,
but it will be devasting for the advance of personal computing.
Richard C. Logan
Mark Elliott
In article <AF01798...@206.173.241.140>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
> Remember to Boycott 7.6.
Remember to look at 7.6/7.7/Rhapsody/whatever, look at the price tag and
decide if it is worth it. If it's worth it, buy it.
If you want Rhapsody on non-PCI powermacs (I do since I have one) then tell
them and hope they do it. At the end of the day, only they really know if
it can be done.
Let's all be reasonable now. Most of us live in free countries, and do what
we choose.
If we start to boycott Apple now (when it looks like they are getting their
act together about system software) then we will lose in the end.
And for what it's worth, I have a suspicion that while 7.6 won't include
much that we don't already have, most of the stuff under the hood will make
it all work together much better. Mind you, I'll get it included in my
developer mailing, so I'm not too worried about the price. In fact, if you
want to be reasonably up to date, the developer mailing may well be the
cheapest way to do it.
Mark
Jack Howarth
In article <lewisda-ya0235800...@news.dal.ca>, lew...@tuns.ca.REMOVE.CAPS.TO.REPLY (Dave L.) wrote:
>I honestly think that a lot of it has to do with fear mongering and
>propaganda. If the media says that Apple is dead enough times, then it will
>eventually become a reality... a self-fulfilling prophesy. Likewise, if the
>media tells people enough times that Bill Gates, the biggest geek that ever
>lived, is a cyber-god who was sent to earth to guide us all into the brave
>new electronic frontier, then people will believe that too. The Mac is
>still far superior to a Win95 machine but all we hear about in the media is
>"Apple is dead" and Apple has made no attempt to refute those claims. It's
>called *propeganda* and *fear mongering*. Apple has to come up with an
>aggresive hard hitting marketing campaign to get the truth out. I'm sick to
>death of this pathetic sacarine coated Hallmark-style "give your dreams a
>chance" Performa crap!!!!!
Hmmm...Apple just had its debt rating lowered again today...does that say anything
about the confidence of the business world in Apple Computer.
Charles W Swiger
Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.next.misc: 14-Jan-97 Re: Feedback to
Apple about.. by Homer Sim...@post.drexe
> of the Unkowns. My fear is that this new os will be nothing more than
> OpenStep repackaged. This does not excite me at all. What's new, what's
> exciting about it? It's UNIX for crying outloud with a pretty interface.
Can I say that you're very much mistaken about what OPENSTEP is without
starting an argument? Perhaps not, but we'll see.
Fact: OPENSTEP is not Unix.
OPENSTEP is a platform-independant API and object library for developing
applications which can run on many platforms-- not just Unix. For a
real-world example, remember that you can run OPENSTEP apps on NT.
[ ... ]
> I had hoped for a truely modern os that would take advantage of
> improvements made to memory management, files systems and distributed
> symetric multiprocessing that have been discussed in Computer Science over
> the last decade. Instead we are getting the same basic design that System
> Vr4 gave us with some things fixed and a nice facade to a command line
> interface along with 2.5 Mach kernel which is about 7 or 8 years old now.
Where to start?
First, the Mach kernel used under NEXTSTEP is a well designed piece of
work. It has good preemptive multitasking with kernel thread support.
It has a very good virtual memory implementation, including
copy-on-write, shared memory via pages mapping into multiple address
spaces and fast IPC via Mach messaging to either local or remote
processes.
NeXT has never released an SMP version of NEXTSTEP, but Mach is
SMP-capable, and didn't Apple say there were going to support SMP?
While NEXTSTEP normally uses the Berkeley FFS (which again is a
well-done, mature filesystem implementation that's much better than HFS,
FAT-xx, or HPFS, and reasonably comparible to NTFS), there was a version
of TransArc's Andrew File System (AFS) available which gave ACL's,
replicated fileservers, and so forth.
Could Mach be improved? Of course. It would be great if they supported
user paging objects, updated their NFS implementation, and added more of
the BSD 4.4 networking capabilities (although NEXTSTEP does include some
of the BSD 4.4 functionality). I also wouldn't mind seeing the FFS be
replaced by JFS or XFS, but that's less important.
> I won't even begin to discuss the security issues that unix can present.
I would note that the vast majority of security problems with Unix
systems are due to poor administration and OS vendors shipping insecure
systems.
Apple would do itself and its customers a big favor by handling security
better than other OS vendors have done in the past.
> NeXT has done a fine job of hiding most of UNIX with its appKits and its
> Objective C usage but it is still Unix under the hood.
NEXTSTEP is, yes. That's one of NEXTSTEP's greatest strengths compared
to most of the other operating systems used on personal computers.
As I said above, OPENSTEP has nothing to do with Unix.
-Chuck
Charles Swiger | cs...@andrew.cmu.edu | standard disclaimer
----------------+---------------------+---------------------
I know you're an optimist if you think I'm a pessimist.
Hugo Burm
In article <5bdsh4$j...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> ra...@porter.as.utexas.edu
(William Raphael Hix) writes:
> Ken Schrock (ke...@cannet.com) wrote:
>
> : Then why does Apple's market share keep dropping?
>
> The number of Mac users is in fact growing. However since this group is
> growing at a rate slower than the rate of growth for total computer
> users, the market share (the percentage of the total) is declining.
>
> Raph
>
Your definition of market share sounds ok, but I have the impression that
when journalists are talking about market share, they are talking about
the percentage of newly sold copies. The market share journalists are
talking about is dropping faster than your definition.
(Probably the same journalists that are talking about stabilization of the
growth rate of inflation.)
J. Paul Lindblad
>> I'm sure that this wasn't the first instance where Apple said that
Copland
>> would run on NuBus PowerMacs - just the earliest that I've dug up so
far.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely- it
>is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
>does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
>they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
>
Copland's intended but failed attempt at multitasking and protected memory
is real, here today on NeXT. Two of the three Mach kernals considered have
run on the PPC 601. The issue is Apple's commitment [really lacking] to
maintain a system for a lot of current users - especially NuBus PowerMac
owners.
Fred H. Turner, III
>The people who really need
>and will use a modern OS have already moved on.
>
>michael
Oh, really? I "really need and will use" a modern OS, but, you know,
Michael, I just haven't gotten around to having a couple thousand extra
bucks in my pocket to replace this rickety old, piece-o'-shit 7100 of mine
with. Sure, it hardly runs and is so slow that I'd rather use my old Mac
Classic, but I just can't quite afford a gee-whiz PCI-based machine yet.
The poor NuBus-based 7100 is a whopping 2 years old now, so I'm amazed that
it even boots anymore. I think Apple should listen to you-- why in the hell
would they want to support someone who just spent $4000 on their equipment
2 years ago. Oh, I'm sorry-- I forgot that by that time, it will have been
3 years. Heck, I imagine most of us who bought ancient, NuBus machines way
back then will be dead and buried by that time.
Jack Howarth
>The computer industry is a funny place. Think about it this way, Apple
>Mac's used to represent 10-15% of the computers, then the PC sales picked
>up and new computers were sold to people who didn't have computers before.
>Apple keeps 96-98% of their users. The problem comes in that the growth
>rate is probably around 4-6% also, so it' s a wash.
>
>In other words, there are no MORE Apple Sales, but no less either. The
>computer industry is growing, therefore apple's "share" of this pie keeps
>getting smaller, but not so many less buyers/users.
>
>Make sense? Good! cause I almost forgot why I was writing this! :)
>
>So his point, that most Mac users stay with Mac's, is true still. I will
>always use a Mac, even if the company goes under, when I can't use my Mac
>any more, I will toss it out and never use a computer again..
>
Perhaps your conclusion from the observation that repeat buyers rather than new owners
make up the overwhelming bulk of Apple's sales should have been as follows. Since the above
is true, it is insane for Apple to permanently alienate such a large segment of its user base
as Nubus Powermac owners. I warn you that if Nubus Powermac owners leave the platform
they will take a large share of 68K owners will go with them.
The Nubus Powermac owners were the risk takers during the transition to the PPC
and these sort of people tend to be more technically adept. They are the sort others
ask for help and advice. What recommendation do you suspect these folks will make
when asked by 68K owners about what model of Macintosh to buy? I myself have stopped
all recommendations on Apple hardware until they have resolved the issue of Rhapsody
support for Nubus Powermacs in a reasonable and honest fashion (no vague promises).
Perhaps if their sales and stock price craters for a quarter or two they will come
to their senses.
Zxeses
In article <mazulauf-130...@sneezy.met.utah.edu>,
mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu (Mike Zulauf) wrote:
> Being smart is pissing off some of your most loyal customers? People who
> bought the NuBus PowerMacs supported Apple in the transition to PPC. Now
> Apple is considering dumping them. Doesn't sound so smart to me.
How did we go from "Currently Shipping Mac's" to "Apple is considering
dumping".... I do follow the logic sure, but before we start complaining
about something we know *NOTHING* factual about, lets come to an
understanding that Apple will be reasonable and give major segments of
their user base what they want.
> If Apple is going to support NuBus PowerMacs, as was promised, then they
> better say so soon, before the shit hits the fan. As for System 7, it's a
> dog that should have been shot years ago. It will never offer the
> benefits of a modern OS.
Why must they say so soon? Why can't you wait until it actually SHIPS
before you hit them with 'shit'??
End of the year people, just tell Apple what you want and then wait it out,
don't KILL apple for something they havent don't yet!
-----
A loyal mac addict, Apple lover, and all around resonable guy, who would
rather eat razors and lead paint then use Winsuck-Anything. If Apple stops
MAKING computers, I will stop USING computers.
--
Zxeses
Mike Zulauf
In article <zxeses-ya02408000...@news.zapcom.net>,
zxe...@stop.spams.dead.edu (Zxeses) wrote:
> How did we go from "Currently Shipping Mac's" to "Apple is considering
> dumping".... I do follow the logic sure, but before we start complaining
> about something we know *NOTHING* factual about, lets come to an
> understanding that Apple will be reasonable and give major segments of
> their user base what they want.
For the umpteenth time, Apple is "investigating the work required to
support older systems." If you can't see that this means they are
considering dumping those older systems then you need to take a reading
comprehension course.
Here is the relevant blurb:
"Apple's goal is for Rhapsody to support all PowerPC-processor based
Macintosh hardware sold by Apple and Apple licensees today, and all
upcoming products including the PowerPC Platform, also known as CHRP.
Apple is investigating the work required to support older systems as
well."
from "Mac OS and NeXT Technologies FAQ."
http://macos.apple.com/macos/releases/rhapsody/faq.rhap.html
> Why must they say so soon? Why can't you wait until it actually SHIPS
> before you hit them with 'shit'??
>
> End of the year people, just tell Apple what you want and then wait it out,
> don't KILL apple for something they havent don't yet!
Once Apple makes the decision, then we won't be able to influence it at
all. Do you understand that? The whole point of all this bitching is to
let Apple know that they _must_ decide to support the NuBus PowerMacs!
Another reason to act soon is that many people will not want to sink much
money into a sytem that may be a dead-ender. I know that I am delaying
purchasing anything major for my Mac - I've heard similar sentiments for
others. In case you haven't heard, sales of Mac software are dropping -
this does nothing to help the platform. See the following URL for more
info:
(http://www.macweek.com/top_stories/nw_soft_sales.html
> A loyal mac addict, Apple lover, and all around resonable guy, who would
> rather eat razors and lead paint then use Winsuck-Anything. If Apple stops
> MAKING computers, I will stop USING computers.
Well good for you. Most of us are a little more balanced than that. For
me, to quit using computers would mean having to enter a completely new
line of work, and throwing a way many years of education.
Jack Howarth
In article <u73n2u9...@petcon2.fnal.gov>, John Palkovic <palk...@fnal.gov> wrote:
>
>Fred, thanks for your cogent and relevant commentary. I have a
>Performa 6116 at home, should I throw it in the dumpster tonight and
>then kill myself? It may not run Rhapsody, and life just has no
>meaning for me anymore. Why, oh why did I buy a Nubus Powermac? *
>
>
Perhaps it doesn't really matter to you that your Mac will never be able to run a totally native
modern os with pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory. Perhaps you don't really
mind having to reboot a machine daily or even hourly compared to having it run without
going down for months at a time. The problem is that many others do and quite a few of
them were the trail-blazers who bought into the original Powermacs back when there was
virtually no native software at all. They stayed with Apple because of the promise of the
PPC and Copland/Gershwin eventually running on their machines. The problem Apple has
is these sort of people are often in charge of running computer centers or the guru that
others seek out for advice. By alienating these people, Apple can not begin to buy enough
advertising to undo all the negative PR they will bring on themselves. The issue is simple
as it is clear. Apple presented us with two promised system upgrades (Copland and Gershwin)
while leaving the impression that at least the latest machine at the time (Nubus Powermacs)
would be able to run them. If Apple's position is that because it never explicitly promised any
particular machine it made would run Copland and/or Gershwin than they should have added
a huge caveat to their press releases stating '"these operating systems shall eventually
run on some system we eventually produce provided we ever eventually release the os".
At the moment one can only go by the reality of the situation. We have Rhapsody, a vapor OS,
which unlikely ever run on 50% of the user base (68K machines) and could very well not
run on another 30% (Nubus Powermacs). On the other hand, we have NT which can run on a
fast 486 and up which includes the bulk of PCs currently in use. Is it any wonder that Mac
promoters are often treated these days as harmless morons? Someone needs to turn the
reality distortion generator off around here and point out that the emperor has no clothes.
J. Paul Lindblad
>I have a Performa 6116 at home, should I throw it in the dumpster tonight
and
>then kill myself? It may not run Rhapsody, and life just has no
>meaning for me anymore. Why, oh why did I buy a Nubus Powermac? *
>
>
Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
PowerMacs.
Perhaps you found a lesser need for a platform to run graphics-intensive
applications as opposed to games, home use...
You are right about trying to determine where the cut-off is for Rhapsody.
Now lets get Apple to do the same.
John Kestner
>End of the year people, just tell Apple what you want and then wait it out,
>don't KILL apple for something they havent don't yet!
No shit! Although some say we have to jump on Apple's back now, to make
sure they _do_ support NuBus PPCs, I think it's been taken too far,
jumping to conclusions much like the article in the Chicago Tribune. And
now there's danger of a vicious circle; people don't want to buy Macs
because they think the company's going under, then the company does worse.
People then say, "See, I told you." Most people are idiots. Yes, we need to
give Apple constructive criticism, but we shouldn't kill it. Then we all
lose.
Also, we should keep in mind that NuBus PPCs will at least be supported for
years to come with Sys7 upgrades. Besides, you should buy a computer for
what it can do now, not what you hope it will do years down the road.
Nothing is for certain in this industry, and this way you won't be
disappointed.
>A loyal mac addict, Apple lover, and all around resonable guy, who would
>rather eat razors and lead paint then use Winsuck-Anything. If Apple stops
>MAKING computers, I will stop USING computers.
Amen.
john
In the year 2000... "David Copperfield will finally reveal how he does his
tricks...He's Jesus!" - Andy Richter
Mike Zulauf
> What recommendation do you suspect these folks will make
> when asked by 68K owners about what model of Macintosh to buy? I myself
have stopped
> all recommendations on Apple hardware until they have resolved the issue
of Rhapsody
> support for Nubus Powermacs in a reasonable and honest fashion (no vague
promises).
Heh, heh. I've already let die one possible purchase of a new Performa
system (to replace an ancient PC). My parents were considering getting a
Mac based on how I'd recommended them in the past. No more. I told them
that Apple had become very unreliable, and nobody could be certain of the
support they would receive (both from Apple and third party).
They bought a new PC, and it has worked flawlessly for them.
Jim Wong
In article <AF04295...@206.173.240.58>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
> >I have a Performa 6116 at home, should I throw it in the dumpster tonight
> and
> >then kill myself? It may not run Rhapsody, and life just has no
> >meaning for me anymore. Why, oh why did I buy a Nubus Powermac? *
> >
> >John
> >
> Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
> PowerMacs.
This doesn't make any sense.
--
Jim Wong (jd-...@uiuc.edu)
Mike Zulauf
In article <jak-ya023680001...@news.asu.edu>, j...@asu.edu
(John Kestner) wrote:
> Besides, you should buy a computer for
> what it can do now, not what you hope it will do years down the road.
> Nothing is for certain in this industry, and this way you won't be
> disappointed.
If people hadn't been looking to the future, Apple would have had a much
harder time making the transition to the PPC. Perhaps the early adoptees
of the PowerMac (myself included) were a little too trusting of Apple.
You can be assured that if Apple doesn't support our machines, we won't
make that mistake again.
Ala'a H. Jawad
Zxeses wrote:
> A loyal mac addict, Apple lover, and all around resonable guy, who would
> rather eat razors and lead paint then use Winsuck-Anything. If Apple stops
> MAKING computers, I will stop USING computers.
I fully share with your sentiments about Apple, I've been loyal to Apple
since 1979. I've also used NeXTstep for a while, and I think _THE_
killer OS is finally gonna be introduced from the talents of these two
companies.
But back to the point at hand: I find it hard to believe that Apple
still supports (OS wise) the Mac Plus some 11 years after its
introduction, but will not support computers that the company shipped 3
years ago that utilize the same family of processors, but a different
bus???
Lets say thats exactly what they are going to do: the original poster
had a valid point, since in 1994 Apple was pitching its next wonderfull
system -- then it was promised for 1995, but thats another story -- to
those same customers who believed in the transition to the new PPC
paradigm, and remember in those days many were warning about backward
compatibility with 68k software - its only a memory now.
I have in mind those who made a big investment in 1st generation PPC
Macs, publishing companies -- Apples most venerable customers -- who
usually upgrade their systems every 5 years or so, suddenly realizing
they have to upgrade one year ahead of schedule in order to enjoy the
transition to the new OS? I hope Apple does the wise thing and stick to
its original promise of support for all true PPC units.
-A l a ' a
Dave L.
how...@nitro.med.uc.edu (Jack Howarth) wrote:
>Perhaps you don't really
> mind having to reboot a machine daily or even hourly compared to having
it run without
> going down for months at a time.
Well, the crashing is completely unacceptable as is the non-native OS.
However, even if my Mac crashed once an hour (which is an *extreme*
exaggeration) I would still be *far* more productive that I would be using
any Mircosoft OS. I'm more than willing to continue using System 7 for this
reason even if I cannot run Rhapsody right away. It's not perfect by any
means, but it's **many** times better and more productive than the
alternative in my opinion and for the work that I do. Rhapsody is still a
year and a half away, so I figure that I will be close to wanting a new
machine by then even if Rhapsody *does* run no my current machine.
Siamak Ansari
{snip]
>
> -----
> A loyal mac addict, Apple lover, and all around resonable guy, who would
> rather eat razors and lead paint then use Winsuck-Anything. If Apple stops
> MAKING computers, I will stop USING computers.
>
Ah, the follies of slavish loyalty.
Mike Zulauf
> So his point, that most Mac users stay with Mac's, is true still. I will
> always use a Mac, even if the company goes under, when I can't use my Mac
> any more, I will toss it out and never use a computer again..
God, what a moron. I hope your work doesn't rely on computers - I'd hate
to have to support you through welfare.
Mike Zulauf
> "J. Paul Lindblad" <sear...@concentric.net> wrote:
> >We Nubus PowerMac Apple loyalists from the 128 days shall not be neglected,
> >ignored or passed over by Apple today. We are forming a class action that
> >you too can recoup your losses from Apple's breaches of contract.
>
> That's the true American spirit! (litigate! litigate! litigate!)
Yeah, yeah, yeah!!! Sue, sue, sue!!! Gimme, gimme, gimme!!! NOW!
whoo, sorry about that, you got me going there. . .
> Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
> support all current hardware.
Apple said it would support currently _shipping_ hardware. My 7100 is
currently hardware, though it's not shipping. The idea behind all the
noise is to get Apple to decide for NuBus support, before they decide
against it.
Matt Brubeck
In article <AF04295...@206.173.240.58>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
>Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
>PowerMacs.
"16 bit processing?" What are you talking about? Would you care to
elaborate, because I'm fairly certain that, whatever you are trying to say
by this, it's not correct...
,--------------.-------------------.
| Matt Brubeck I bru...@wport.com |
`--------------^-------------------'
Matt Brubeck
In article <AF04295...@206.173.240.58>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
>Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
>PowerMacs.
What exactly do you mean by this? I'm fairly certain there isn't any major
difference in bus, motherboard, RAM paging... between the 61xx performas
and their x100 cousins.
Gary W. Longsine
Hi folks,
This thread continues to rage on. Meanwhile, in another thread, I found:
rhapsody-d...@apple.com
leade...@apple.com
http://www.apple.com/main/contact.html
I suggest that each of you with one or more NuBus PowerMac(s) compose a short
email, with the subject, "Please include NuBus support in GA Rhapsody" and
send it to the two relevant addresses listed. It will do much more for your
cause than endless speculation here.
Be polite, and include the following information:
1.) I own XXX NuBus PowerMacs.
2.) I would be willing to upgrade RAM and DISK if needed to run a modern
32-bit OS on my NuBus PowerMac.
3.) I would be willing to pay $XXX.YY for the OS upgrade for Rhapsody to run
on my NuBus PowerMac.
4.) Please commit to this publicly as soon as you are able, since I'm going
insane with fear.
Please note that I, myself, do not own such a machine, and will encourage
Apple to do this anyway, while honestly admitting that I don't own a NuBus
PowerMac. I just think that if it's possible (which it should be) then it's
really The Right Thing (tm). I own a NeXTstation Turbo (mono) and I believe
that Rhapsody will probably run on that machine, too, since it essentially
already does. ;-)
/gary
--
Gary W. Longsine, Systems Engineer | ____/|
PLATINUM Technologies, Inc. | \ o.O| "The meek shall
long...@platinum.com (NeXTmail | =(_)= inherit nothin'."
(612) 688-3033 x7814 & MIME) |. U - Frank Zappa
Garance A Drosehn
"Ala'a H. Jawad" <alj...@kuwait.net> wrote:
> But back to the point at hand: I find it hard to believe that
> Apple still supports (OS wise) the Mac Plus some 11 years after
> its introduction, but will not support computers that the company
> shipped 3 years ago that utilize the same family of processors,
> but a different bus???
I believe it's true that system 7.6 will not run on a Mac Plus,
or any other 68000 or 68020-based systems. I don't remember if
it includes support for 68030-based systems.
> Let's say thats exactly what they are going to do:
Let us say it isn't. Apple has not been good at delivering on
promises for hardware upgrade paths, but it has done fairly
well at supporting things in software. It would not surprise
me if Rhapsody is never ported to 68K machines, but I don't
think the bus will be a big stopping point. It's just that
the initial release (this year's developer version) may not
include support for them.
---
Garance Alistair Drosehn = g...@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer (MIME & NeXTmail capable)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy NY USA
Scott Maxwell
In article <siamak-ya02408000...@netnews2.worldnet.att.net>,
sia...@worldnet.att.net (Siamak Ansari) wrote:
And the intelligence to not use Win-anything.
--
--------------------------------
Scott Maxwell - sco...@nic.com
"We are a fact-gathering organization only... the minute the FBI begins
making recommendations on what should be done with its information, it
becomes a Gestapo." -- J. Edgar Hoover
Jack Howarth
I believe in some of the earlier Powermac Performas there was the difference that
the databus to the memory was only 32-bit rather than 64-bit wide. This accounts
for the apparent faster response of say a 8100/80 compared to a 6300/100. You
can also tell this is the case by the fact that the 6100/7100/8100 motherboards
required memory to be added in pairs of SIMMs (i.e. 2x32-bit address lines) whereas
the Performas would take single SIMMS. This may not be true on the top-of-line new
Performas like the 6400.
eye photo
In article <5bpf55$9...@news.platinum.com>, long...@platinum.com (Gary W.
Longsine) wrote:
>Hi folks,
>
>This thread continues to rage on. Meanwhile, in another thread, I found:
>
> rhapsody-d...@apple.com
> leade...@apple.com
>
> http://www.apple.com/main/contact.html
>
[.........]
Thanks........
--
mcs[at]frii[dot]com mark[dot]short[at]uchsc[dot]edu
Art Isbell
long...@platinum.com (Gary W. Longsine) wrote:
> I own a NeXTstation Turbo (mono) and I believe
> that Rhapsody will probably run on that machine, too, since it essentially
> already does. ;-)
I certainly don't expect Apple to spend *any* precious resources creating
a version of Rhapsody for 50,000 NeXT machines when many more PPC/NuBus Mac
owners are very concerned about the availability of Rhapsody for their
hardware.
Talk of a new kernel is prevalent. Porting that to NeXT hardware will
require some effort although probably not too much. I expect OPENSTEP/Mach
4.2 to be the last operating system for NeXT hardware.
--
Art Isbell NeXT/MIME Mail: ais...@ix.netcom.com
Trego Systems Voice/Fax: +1 408 335 2515
CaseServ: OPENSTEP Voice Mail: +1 408 335 1154
managed care solutions US Mail: Felton, CA 95018-9442
Christopher Masi
In article <AF04295...@206.173.240.58>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
> >I have a Performa 6116 at home, should I throw it in the dumpster tonight
> and
> >then kill myself? It may not run Rhapsody, and life just has no
> >meaning for me anymore. Why, oh why did I buy a Nubus Powermac? *
> >
> >John
> >
> Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
> PowerMacs.
>
> Perhaps you found a lesser need for a platform to run graphics-intensive
> applications as opposed to games, home use...
>
> You are right about trying to determine where the cut-off is for Rhapsody.
>
> Now lets get Apple to do the same.
>
> - Paul
>
Ahh...actually the 611x series performas are PowerMacs; same thing as a
PPC 6100 (that is what is written on the motherboard). I bought a 611x
because it was the only affordable PPC out there at the time.
Christopher
Christopher Masi
In article <mazulauf-170...@dopey.met.utah.edu>,
mazu...@atmos.met.utah.edu.NO_SPAM (Mike Zulauf) wrote:
> > Seriously, isn't this a bit premature? Apple said that Rhapsody would
> > support all current hardware.
>
> Apple said it would support currently _shipping_ hardware. My 7100 is
> currently hardware, though it's not shipping. The idea behind all the
> noise is to get Apple to decide for NuBus support, before they decide
> against it.
>
> Mike
Mike,
I have a 6115 and I feel your pain. If I ship you my Mac and you ship
it back will that make it a currently shipping Mac?
Chris
Christopher Masi
> In article <brubeck-ya0240800...@snews.zippo.com>,
bru...@wport.com (Matt Brubeck) wrote:
>
> >In article <AF04295...@206.173.240.58>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
> ><sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
> >>PowerMacs.
> >
> >What exactly do you mean by this? I'm fairly certain there isn't any major
> >difference in bus, motherboard, RAM paging... between the 61xx performas
> >and their x100 cousins.
> >
> > ,--------------.-------------------.
> > | Matt Brubeck I bru...@wport.com |
> > `--------------^-------------------'
>
> I believe in some of the earlier Powermac Performas there was the
difference that
> the databus to the memory was only 32-bit rather than 64-bit wide. This
accounts
> for the apparent faster response of say a 8100/80 compared to a 6300/100. You
> can also tell this is the case by the fact that the 6100/7100/8100
motherboards
> required memory to be added in pairs of SIMMs (i.e. 2x32-bit address
lines) whereas
> the Performas would take single SIMMS. This may not be true on the
top-of-line new
> Performas like the 6400.
> Jack
611x's require 2 same size SIMMs to be put in also. 6400's require
DIMM's. So I would say these are 64 bit data busses. The 62xx are 32 bit
data busses they are based on the 600's (680LC40's no PPC) motherboard
which has a 32 bit data bus also. The early Performa's (611x) were
actually better than the next generation (6200's).
Christopher
J. Paul Lindblad
>>>Performas do have 16 bit processing compared to 32 for other NuBus
>>>PowerMacs.
>>
>>What exactly do you mean by this? I'm fairly certain there isn't any
major
>>difference in bus, motherboard, RAM paging... between the 61xx performas
>>and their x100 cousins.
>>
difference that
>the databus to the memory was only 32-bit rather than 64-bit wide. This
accounts
>for the apparent faster response of say a 8100/80 compared to a 6300/100.
You
>can also tell this is the case by the fact that the 6100/7100/8100
motherboards
>required memory to be added in pairs of SIMMs (i.e. 2x32-bit address
lines) whereas
>the Performas would take single SIMMS. This may not be true on the
top-of-line new
>Performas like the 6400.
>
> Jack
>
PowerMacs offer...for the 'NeXT' system to become established. Just as much
as NuBus PowerMac owners require Rhaposody to develop the untapped
potential of NuBus PowerMacs.
Maybe the cut-off point for compatibility with Rhaposody is the early
Performa - based on the 32-bit limitation.
-Paul
J. Paul Lindblad
> I certainly don't expect Apple to spend *any* precious resources
creating
>a version of Rhapsody for 50,000 NeXT machines when many more PPC/NuBus
Mac
>owners are very concerned about the availability of Rhapsody for their
>hardware.
>
>Art
An open letter to Apple's leadership:
ASAP thinking to solve financial problems does_not_get the intended
results. Short-term cost-cutting puts the company's long term ability on
thin ice [to attract new and maintain long-standing customers such as Nubus
PowerMac owners].
My guess is that Apple has underestimated [not PowerMac unit demand again]
but this time the strength of the in-place customer base.
Nubus PowerMacs have a 40Mhz bus speed, L2 cache, RAM slots up to 72 Meg,
and easily clock-chipped to 80hz. A good threshold for Rhapsody.
Maintaining the loyal customer base has become the pivotal point [of
Apple's survival] that hinges on the NuBus PowerMac decision.
Promises of native code, muti-tasking, and protected memory were made [not
only to sell product and solve the long-standing freezes, crashes and
errors that have diminished and retarded NuBus PowerMacs' performance] but
to herald a quantum leap that Copland manifested.
It's folly for Apple to cause a tearing away of the fabric woven by
developers and customers that helped this transition by not supporting
NuBus PowerMacs with Rhapsody.
Facing dwindling marketshare and developer support, Apple does have 1.8
billion in cash to make improvements with.
Consider the future if Apple jettisons Nubus PowerMacs:
1] Lost revenue from no Rhapsody sales to Nubus PowerMacs owners.
2] Developers develop less for Rhapsody, sensing a diminished target
market.
3] Given the juncture at no option but upgrading to PCI models, Nubus
PowerMacs owners decide to leave Apple permanently and buy from some
other Mac-compatible company.
4] Seeing Apple rid itself of valued customers, more Mac-compatible
companies are created and prosper - at Apple's expense.
All this happens if Apple antes her future and gambles away the NuBus
PowerMac customers.
- Paul
Frank Taylor
In article <AF06E8B...@206.173.240.158>, "J. Paul Lindblad"
<sear...@concentric.REMOVEthisToRespond.net> wrote:
-> Certainly Rhaposody _needs_the in-place customer base that owners of NuBus
-> PowerMacs offer...for the 'NeXT' system to become established. Just as much
-> as NuBus PowerMac owners require Rhaposody to develop the untapped
-> potential of NuBus PowerMacs.
->
-> Maybe the cut-off point for compatibility with Rhaposody is the early
-> Performa - based on the 32-bit limitation.
->
-> -Paul
-----------------------------------------------------
You finally seem to be pleased with something. It's OK for someone to
get left out as long as it's not you. Early Performa owners can't even
get their logic boards replaced and you've been crying because you might
not be able to run the new operating system.
You use up a lot more space in these newsgroups than the people who have
real unresolved problems.
--
Frank Taylor
<mailto:fra...@mindspring.com>
Leon von Stauber
NOTE: FOLLOWUPS TO COMP.SYS.MAC.ADVOCACY
In <zxeses-ya0230800...@news.zapcom.net> Zxeses wrote:
>
>Apple keeps 96-98% of their users.
And this figure is based on...?
>The problem comes in that the growth
>rate is probably around 4-6% also, so it' s a wash.
>
>In other words, there are no MORE Apple Sales, but no less either. The
>computer industry is growing, therefore apple's "share" of this pie keeps
>getting smaller, but not so many less buyers/users.
Well, that's not quite true. There are quite a few companies which actively
eliminate Macs from their organizations in favor of PCs. (I have,
unfortunately, had first-hand experience with a few of these.)
____________________________________________________________________
Leon von Stauber http://www.occam.com/leonvs/
Occam's Razor, Game Designer <leo...@occam.com>
PSW Technologies, System Administrator <leo...@pswtech.com>
MIDS, Web Developer <leo...@mids.org>
"We have not come to save you, but you will not die in vain!"
Vlod Kalicun
Michael Alfonso Visconti wrote:
> But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely- it
> is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
> does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
> they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
>
It was my impression that parts of copland would be incorporated into
rapsody. There is a LOT of cool stuff in copland!
Theres no reason for them not to drop the Mach kernal and use the one
in Copland.
-vlod
Scott Anguish
On 01/21/97, Vlod Kalicun wrote:
>Michael Alfonso Visconti wrote:
>
>> But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely- it
>> is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
>> does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
>> they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
>>
>
>It was my impression that parts of copland would be incorporated into
>rapsody. There is a LOT of cool stuff in copland!
>
Is there any information on this on Apple web site?
>Theres no reason for them not to drop the Mach kernal and use the one
>in Copland.
>
Are there any compelling reasons to do it? (i.e. is it worth the
risk?)
--
Scott Anguish DBS Online - http://www.dbs-online.com/DBS
sang...@digifix.com Stepwise OpenStep WWW - http://www.stepwise.com
Peter Lees
On Sun, 12 Jan 1997 18:19:17 -0500, Jack Howarth (how...@nitro.med.uc.edu) wrote:
> ps The idea of buying a new computer every 3 years is what makes me shudder. The Nubus
> Powermacs have a 64-bit data bus running as fast as 40 MHz (which is within spitting distance
> of anything on the Mac now). This crap people are spewing about the first generation Powermacs
> being decrepit is ridiculous. This will be a real problem for Apple. The bleeding edge folk with money
> to burn are willing to let Apple write off the Nubus PPCs for the 'greater good'. It's no wonder
> market share is down from 8% to 5%. The business world does not write off equipment in 3 years.
in fact, australian taxation laws allow you to do exactly that.
it you want to be conservative, you can estimate your computer equipment
will deprectiate to 0 in 5 years, but you're not required to take that path.
in any case, nubus powermac will continue to have useful life in
many places for years to come - we still have LC IIIs, IIci's an SE30
and even a Mac PLus being used for useful work.
hint: don't keep upgrading your software. if it works, leave it alone.
another point to consider is that mklinux is being developed for
nubus powermacs. can anyone say "web farm" ?
p
--
Peter Lees (pe...@next.com.au) - Technical Manager, Next Online
tel: +61 2 9310 1433 * fax: +61 2 9310 1315 * http://www.next.com.au
"You can have a day off when you're dead, Baldrick, and not before..."
Vlod Kalicun
Scott Anguish wrote:
>
> On 01/21/97, Vlod Kalicun wrote:
> >Michael Alfonso Visconti wrote:
> >
> >> But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely- it
> >> is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
> >> does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
> >> they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
> >>
> >
> >It was my impression that parts of copland would be incorporated into
> >rapsody. There is a LOT of cool stuff in copland!
> >
>
> Is there any information on this on Apple web site?
Hmmm.. I've 'read' somewhere that Hancok has not committed to using the mac
kernal. (sorry this is a bit lame). I think shes just investigating all possibility
and by not using mach, this may help her remove the unix aspect.
> >Theres no reason for them not to drop the Mach kernal and use the one
> >in Copland.
> >
>
> Are there any compelling reasons to do it? (i.e. is it worth the
> risk?)
Just because Copland failed doesn't mean that everything about Copland doesn't
work. The reason Copland failed IMHO :) is the compatibility problems. I think
the kernal is quite advanced and works.
I think most mac users will freak when they see the command line. I *know*
that the front end *should* take care of everything.. but whats the reality.
My knowledge of the NEXT is limited. Do you have to mess with sendmail, crontab,
/dev etc?
They have put in substantial resources into Copland and since OPENSTEP is kernal
independant, theres no reason for them not to evaulate putting it on Copland's
kernal.
Just my .02 cents worth..
-vlod
William Raphael Hix
Scott Anguish (sang...@digifix.com) wrote:
: On 01/21/97, Vlod Kalicun wrote:
: >Michael Alfonso Visconti wrote:
: >
: >> But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely- it
: >> is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
: >> does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
: >> they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland died.
: >>
: >
: >It was my impression that parts of copland would be incorporated into
: >rapsody. There is a LOT of cool stuff in copland!
:
: Is there any information on this on Apple web site?
but I don't know if it's still there.
: >Theres no reason for them not to drop the Mach kernal and use the one
: >in Copland.
:
: Are there any compelling reasons to do it? (i.e. is it worth the
: risk?)
NeXT itself planned to update the Mach 2.5 kernal in NeXTStep to
something more modern (Mach 3ish). It seems that currently, Apple has
decided to replace the kernal, the question being which of the competing
possibilities. NeXT Mach 3 work, the PPC Linux kernal, Copland's
NuKernal, and Sun's Solaris kernal, have all been mentioned in the press
as possibilities. It has been postulated that adoption of the NuKernal
would ease the inclusion of the NuBus macs among Rhapsody users, because
a lot of driver work has been done.
Raph
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Raphael Hix Department of Astronomy
ra...@astro.as.utexas.edu University of Texas
Voice: (512) 471-3412 R.L. Moore Hall
FAX: (512) 471-6016 Austin TX 78712
WWW: http://tycho.as.utexas.edu/~raph Room 17.210
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Anguish
On 01/22/97, Vlod Kalicun wrote:
>Scott Anguish wrote:
>>
>> On 01/21/97, Vlod Kalicun wrote:
>> >Michael Alfonso Visconti wrote:
>> >
>> >> But COPLAND was scrapped, remember? This is a different OS entirely-
it
>> >> is NOT the remains of Copland at all. So what was said about Copland
>> >> does not necessarilly hold true for NextMacOS. They publically said
>> >> they scrapped it. There were no half truths about that. Copland
died.
>> >>
>> >
>> >It was my impression that parts of copland would be incorporated into
>> >rapsody. There is a LOT of cool stuff in copland!
>> >
>>
>> Is there any information on this on Apple web site?
>
>kernal. (sorry this is a bit lame). I think shes just investigating all
possibility
>and by not using mach, this may help her remove the unix aspect.
>
Sorry, my question was incorrectly worded I guess.
I'm looking for information on Copland as a whole.
<snip>
>I think most mac users will freak when they see the command line. I *know*
>that the front end *should* take care of everything.. but whats the
reality.
>My knowledge of the NEXT is limited. Do you have to mess with sendmail,
crontab,
>/dev etc?
>
nope. not if you don't want to. crontab is a functionality that can
easily be exploited by a UI though..
>They have put in substantial resources into Copland and since OPENSTEP is
kernal
>independant, theres no reason for them not to evaulate putting it on
Copland's
>kernal.
>
Certainly... by my question is if there was anything compelling
about Copland that would make it a better choice...