🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Apr8.071524.16234@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip  
McDunnough) writes:
> In article <1992Apr7.191741.12260@cs.yale.edu>  
nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu writes:
> >
> >As far as I've seen, NeXTstep and the machines have
> >supported unix networking out of the box, and 3rd parties
> >have offered connectivity solutions for Mac
> >networking.  The Mac is the opposite.  How does that make
> >the Mac better? 

> The Mac Quadra with A/UX has very good connectivity. It
> even comes with  X. But what I was thinking of was the ease of
> setting up non-Unix based networks. To put a NeXT on a
> network demands a fair amount of know how. That may change
> in 3.0 . All I know is that I can easily link PC's, Mac's my
> GS,...but not the NeXT.

A/UX is an extra-cost item for the Mac.  X-Windows is an
extra cost item for the NeXT.

Networking PC's requires extra-cost hardware and
software, and I've heard plenty of horror stories about
various PC network "solutions".

Networking the Next requires a different investment of
time and knowledge depending upon your needs.  It can be as
easy as attaching cables, powering up, and letting the
bundled tools autoconfig the new host.  Or, it can involve
some knowledge of unix networking. 

> I have to say this. As part of the connectivity issue the
> Mac has good communications' programs and
> faxmodems/sw. We have Neuron. I rest my case. 

I have to say this: apples to oranges.  The Mac in generally
a single-user, single-process machine, and the NeXT is a
multi- user, multi-tasking machine.  The very nature of
the benefits of such mach/unix multi-tasking also makes
it difficult to use the same serial port for data and fax. 
I'm not about to give up the advantages of mach/next for
that one reason! 

--
Nathan Janette		"I'm a NeXTstep man,
Dept MB&B, Yale Univ	 I'm a NeXTcube guy"
New Haven, CT
nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu (NeXT)