🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2179@accuvax.nwu.edu> mccoy@aristotle.Berkeley.EDU (Jim McCoy) writes:

[stuff about printing deleted]

>I find it very amusing that the people supporting the Mac are using
>the same justifications that the PC people used a few years back:
>there is no established software base.

Software base IS relevant if you are considering a purchase of the
NeXT now, just as it was for the Mac when it came out.  People who
don't mind being pioneers will see the potential of the machine and
purchase it anyway.

Both the IBM PC and the Apple II have larger software bases, and most
of this is junk.  What you need is a base large enough to offer
several programs in a variety of categories and at different price and
performance levels.  This takes time and matters to people who need
to find immediate uses for their machines.

>The NeXT is at the same stage that the Mac 128K was a while back.  It
>is trying to build a software base and user base that other systems
>have.  I have no doubt that it will do so, but until it does there
>will be a flock of Mac worshippers who will continue to point out the
>fact that the Mac has a larger software base (remind them that the PC
>has an even larger one :-).

Yes, Mac worshippers will do this.  NeXT worshippers will pretend the
*current* problems don't exist.  I myself prefer to castigate both camps.
:-)

Doug Felt
Courseware Authoring Tools Project
Stanford University