🚀 go-pugleaf

sho@maxwell.physics.purdue.edu (Sho Kuwamoto) writes:

>In article <22438@ut-emx.UUCP> chari@ut-emx.UUCP (Christohpher M. Whatlyey) writes:
>>Really, my roomate is one of the most ignorant people you could find
>>when it comes to computers and he uses WriteNow, PrintManager, Webster
>>Librarian and Quotations quite effectively. He never asks questions and
>>he never complains. He cannot use a Mac and Word. Period!

>Hmmm...  Why not compare WriteNow on the NeXT and WriteNow on the Mac?
>Word (v3, anyway) is one of the worse offenders of the mac philosophy,
>and even so, it's very usable.  And which is in the room already so he
>can just screw around on it when he feels like it?  And which did he
>learn first?  I'm *not* neccesarily defending the mac on this point
>(although my opinion is that they are about as easy to learn, with
>the mac being slighly easier) just saying that there are many factors.

>about rendering speed with a complex clipping region?

>Now, some legitimate questions about the NeXT system:

>1) I know most of you on USENET who have a NeXT are probably UNIX
>   gurus (at least fluent) to begin with, but put yourself in Joe
>   User's shoes.  Have you ever had to muck about with UNIX?  If so,
>   could this have been avoided, or would J. User have to have done
>   the same for his system?  Running this interface over UNIX is fine,
>   as long as you don't have to go entering a UNIX shell to do
>   anything critical.  A concrete question: would the fact that the
>   interface sits on UNIX make you nervous about reccommending this
>   machine to your sixth grade teacher who you still write to, etc.?

I actually got the NeXT because I wanted UNIX and all of the hell and
pleasure that can come from it. I was a total novice to begin with
when I got and I am definitely not anymore.

>3) Programming: I like the concept of the interface builder, but upon
>   reflection, it seems like it would only save a page or so of
>   code-writing.  Less, if your windowing system uses callback
>   procedures.  Instead of connecting five buttons to five methods,
>   you would include code to insert five function pointers to five
>   button structures or something.   How useful is this thing?

Very useful. You can do callbacks very easily if I understand what you
mean. I typically have a number of buttons message with the same
selector and then have the messaged object determine the proper action
from a quality of the button. It is a bit more flexible that way
sometimes.

>   Slighly unfair, but I can see how it would be somewhat easier to
>   program a NeXT.  However, I imagine that an additional knowledge of
>   UNIX programming would also be needed for some things. 

Not really. NeXT has a large C library that is a NeXTified version of
standard UNIX functions etc.. Ex: NXPrintf prints to a NXStream and
works like fprintf. In general, a knowledge of UNIX is not really
necessary to do basic programming.

-- 
Chris Whatley
Work: chari@pelican.ma.utexas.edu (NeXT Mail)		(512/471-7711 ext 123)
Play: chari@nueces.cactus.org (NeXT Mail)		(512/499-0475)
Also: chari@emx.utexas.edu