🚀 go-pugleaf

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.

The goal should be to get rid of the OS and the Systems' types and Unix while
we are at it. One wants to be able to hook up devices without having to
have someone permanently there, and it should not take reading manuals to
do it.

All of this may be moot once 3.0 comes out for the NeXT. I still don't
see  the problem with Mac's. Are you referring to sw or hardware? Moreover
I would imagine you would agree that remote Appletalk is rather nice.

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.

Philip
philip@utstat.toronto.edu