Slashdot Mirror


Looking Back At NeXT

jregel writes: "Ars Technica has a link to an old Newsweek article that was written when Steve Jobs was about to unveil the NeXT computer. It's an interesting read, with some amusing pictures of industry characters including Scott McNealy and Bill Gates. Although most of us have probably never had the opportunity to play with a NeXT computer or use Nextstep, both the hardware and software were revolutionary and represent one of the biggest missed opportunities in the industry." Then again, how much of this is parallel to the MacOS X stuff? Maybe the photographs will convince people once and for all that I don't look like Steve Jobs.

229 comments

  1. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 1

    Oh, I don't know. Pixar's done just fine. Granted they're not a computer company, but they make and sell a pretty good product (though most of the credit for the 'making' part should go to John Lasseter).

    Also, look at the turnaround Apple has made since he came back on. While I'm sure Bill doesn't exactly lose sleep over whether Mac OS is going to displace Windows, Apple is turning a profit ad that's better than they were doing not so long ago.

    I think marketing is both Steve's greatest strength and his biggest weakness. When he succeeds, he succeeds big (example: the iMac). When he fails, he fails big (example: failing to open the Mac architecture early on). And then, of course, there's the wild card -- the Jobsian Reality Distortion Field.
    --

    --
    Someone you trust is one of us.
  2. Just don't wear black turtle neck shirts by Mr.Phil · · Score: 1

    You do look like Steve, but don't wear black turtle neck shirts and you'll be fine

  3. Re:NeXT was my first UNIX... by fordp · · Score: 1

    I still have a cube sitting here, It gets infrequent use, but I wouldn't part with it.

    As to your post, there was a product called NEXTSTEP/FIP back around 1993 which ran intel, I know that a release existed for atleast version.

    This likley means there is also an OPENSTEP/FIP as for obtaining a copy you might want to try: www.blackholeinc.com they still have next hardware and may be able to give you a lead on the software.

    Of course I think that an educational copy is still in the order of $400, a real pitty if you ask me.

    On another note, I know that NEXTSTEP/FIP 3.2 is approaching the end of reasonable use for things like its video driver. (i.e.: Finding a video card it supports can be a challenge.

  4. NeXT experience by ovapositor · · Score: 2

    We had a room full of NeXT machines in one of our Electrical Engineering labs at University of Rochester back in 1990-91. They were head and shoulders better than the Sun workstations for our purposes. It had a nice Motorola integer DSP built right into it. You could do some pretty cool real time DSP if you were willing to code in assembler. Even the accessories were superb, it came with a 400 dpi laser printer that absolutely everyone in the department printed to for their graphics. You could definately tell the difference when printing out 3D time vs frequency plots as I was doing for my Masters work. Blew away 300 dpi and MacLaser.

    Frankly.. If I had known about IRC and had a client for it on the NeXT, I would have surely flunked out of school :)

  5. Re:Musings on the NeXT by baka_boy · · Score: 3
    NeXT boxes were actually cheaper than equivalent Macs -- it's just that they were much higher-end than your average office/educational/home user's machine. There was an article in Macworld many, many years ago, right after the first color NeXTcubes and stations came out, that benchmarked and cost-compared them to high-end Quadras, and they smoked 'em on both fronts. Remember, this was in Macworld, in an issue with Jobs' replacement CEO at Apple on the cover.

    The original Mac was also spendy as hell, and eventually took off only because of hefty student discounts and the rise of DTP and multimedia. NeXT failed because they never really had a niche -- their systems weren't quite as easy to use as a Mac, due to their UNIX heritage, but weren't quite as powerful as a Sun or SGI; they had great multimedia support in hardware, but initially shipped with a low-bitdepth greyscale monitor; etc., etc.

    Personally, I think that the NeXT systems would have done much better if they had come out a little later...like 1997, when Apple was licensing for clones. The hardware could have been updated for PowerPC, and they would have been kick-ass workstations and lightweight servers. Development on NeXTStep is as easy as development on Windows, without the lobotomizing effects of excessive exposure to Microsoft tools.

    I suppose we're getting pretty close with OS-X. The development environment is incredibly NeXT-like, with a few modern updates (like kick-ass Java support). G4 hardware is considerably cheaper than the old NeXT gear, and they've certainly improved in a number of areas of usability. Then there's the one ingredient that NeXT never had: the laptop. I'll sign whatever I have to for a G4 PowerBook with OS-X...drool...

  6. Another NeXT box owner... by Bug-Y2K · · Score: 1

    In fact I own three.

    I love my slabs (NeXTstations) and used them daily for several years. In fact I used one as my personal web & mail server right up until NeXT's Y2K patch fsck'ed up my sendmail config and I didn't have the patience to patch humpty dumpty back together again.

    I am also a longtime (12 years) SunOS/Solaris admin, *BSD admin, and MacOS admin. I've been playing with Linux for about 6 years now too. Yeah, I've even had to swallow the blue pill and fsck around with NT here and there too. All this has given me an appreciation for the strengths and weaknesses of various OS'es and GUIs. I won't waste your time here by reciting a treatise on them all. I'm an admin not a programmer so I won't comment on the dev tools in NeXT either.

    I *will* however comment on the hardware. NeXT's 'puck' mouse is a joy to use. Still the best mouse devised (and yes, I've used the new Apple 'buttonless' mouse) in fact since my mouse is ADB I still use it on all my Macs (via a switchbox) at work. Plus the keyboard has the CONTROL key in the RIGHT place, between the tab and shift keys and that useless CAPS LOCK is relegated to a far corner of the keyboard... this is the *proper* key placement for a unix (or any OS really) keyboard.

    The black magnesium case is sexy as hell to this day... almost 13 years later. I have my slabs in my office and they never fail to produce gasps and lust from visitors.

    I will concur with another comment here that the NeXT's insides are as gorgeous as their outsides. A very spare, clean design, much like Sun's early Sparc slabs. I hate opening up the case of crappy Intel boxes... they are so cheap, random, and busy by comparison. Apple's designs are just as good if not better. Anyone who flames Apple hardware has never opened up a Mac.

    I look forward to the future of Apple/NeXT with a mixture of anticipation and fear. Anticipation for the final redemption of their great hardware designs and the realization of NeXTstep's amazing architecture. Fear with how the Mac community will endure the move from the MacOS to this brave new world, as they are dragged kicking and screaming forward by an Apple who has an amazing ability to drop balls and screw things up relationshipwise.

    --chuck goolsbee

  7. Musings on the NeXT by skoda · · Score: 2

    NeXT came out while I was in college, and my Alma Mater bought into it. Thus began my love-affair :)

    I spent three summers full-time, and three academic years part-time programming edu apps on the NeXT at Rose-Hulman. I also learned C at the same time. Here are some random thoughts on the computer.

    It's ironic that in the Newsweek article Bill Gates poo-poo's the computer, saying it's no big deal (everyone's got a graphical interface, everyone's got a mouse). I believe MS was transitioning from Win 2.0 to Win 3.0 (or maybe 3.1). The windows interface was an abomination, obviously designed by people who knew nothing about human design issues. The NeXT crushed it in terms of ease of use. Still, Gates was right -- the NeXT was the computer equivalent of a 45rpm record.

    Programming the NeXT was, in many ways, a wonderful experience. The Interface Builder allowed you to create your basic interface 'live', and in some cases, have some basic functionality, before writing a line of code. Perhaps windows and Mac can do this too, but I haven't found a gui programming environment to match the features of the 10 yr old NeXT's.

    A big buzz-phrase in recent years is "object reuse." Been there, done that. By my third year of programming, I understood the system pretty well, and developed a couple standard interface tools that could be implemented from the Interface Builder, and configured with minimal programming additional coding. These were used by my fellow developers to provide a more consistent user interface across our applications. This was not terribly difficult to do with the NeXT.

    I still miss its file manager. I really liked the multi-paned hierarchical browser. It was what Windows Explorer is supposed to be.

    Why did NeXT fail? Because Jobs ran it. I believe that Steve Jobs is a computer visionary. I think he understands what people want, what's cool, and what we be great to work with. I also think that he's got a technical savvy. However, I think he let's his desire for "cool" block his sense of "realistic." The NeXT was awesome. It was truly years ahead of its time. It was also double the cost of an equivalent PC, and more expensive that Macs too. It had a magnesium case (hello? extra cost?), and other such things. Nice, but not helpful in trying to break into a larger market.

    Currently, I am a PC guy. I can't get the software I need on a Mac, and I am put off by the consistent 30% price difference between a PC and it's equivalent Mac. But if the Mac OS X brings in the best parts of NeXT, appropriately improved over the past several years, along with the best of Mac, it may be time to switch computers.

    1. Re:Musings on the NeXT by steveha · · Score: 1
      Why did NeXT fail? Because Jobs ran it. [...] I think he let's his desire for "cool" block his sense of "realistic."

      I agree. Jobs has made some decisions that left me shaking my head.

      The NeXT should have had a floppy. Back in the 80's, most computer users made heavy use of floppy disks to distribute code or data. I remember thinking, "So much for the software market; who will want to release anything on a MO disk that costs $50?"

      The Lisa failed because it cost $10,000. Steve Jobs was there. So, how much was the first NeXT computer? That's right... $10,000. ($6,000 at a student discount, but you can't build a viable business on selling at student discount price.) Later boxes were more reasonable, but what was Jobs thinking with that first box?

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  8. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by jovlinger · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking of getting a non-working cube on the cheap to reuse the case. Anyone know which mobo size it accepts?

  9. Anyone getting rid of any old Nextstep OS CDs? by dsyu · · Score: 1

    I'm starting a collection of "dead operating system" CDs as wall-decoration. I need a Nextstep CD, and if anyone has one that they're just planning on tossing, I'll take it off your hands.

    I went hunting on EBay, but some crazy people were paying $50 and up for used Nextstep CDs, which I couldn't justify for my particular purposes.

  10. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by freebe · · Score: 1

    I have actually played with Aqua (not used it), but in my experience it was a little obnoxious, but then again I didn't like Platinum when that first came around... now I'm a genuine Platinum addict.

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  11. Re:NeXT incremental, not revolutionary by swdunlop · · Score: 1

    Sigh. You sound just like the people in the article, focussing on the hardware too much, and not thinking about why it was put together. NextStep was built with a very solid interface, at a time when only one other OS provided one, MacOS, and when all the unixen were stabbing in the dark with X.

    It had a solid kernel. It had very intelligent application layout, and some APIs that still outclass many of what we're dealing with the in the open source movement today. The biggest problem with NeXT was that they focussed too much on having insanely great hardware (and insanely expensive), and didn't mention their insanely great software enough.

    And it seems, Mac is going to repeat history with OS X, tying it to the G3s and G4s, while leaving the other PowerPCs in the dark, even the third-party accelerator boards aren't going to be supported.. At least they'll be leaving Darwin in their wake before they go under.

  12. Re:The price myth by wcb4 · · Score: 1

    Maybe its true that they were not trying to compete against home computers...They might have really been interested in the workstation market, but if I am not mistaken, they were based on Motorola 68040 processors were they not? If this is true, they may have thought of themselves as workstation producers, but with the power of home comptuers. NeXT, from what I recall, could have made a go of it, but like Apple at times, they could not produce enough of them due to chip shortages. Motorola was producing chips for Apple, who could not get their hands on enough of them, so there was very little left for NeXT.

    NeXTStep did, however, have an intel incarnation, which I actually did get to use. Very nice Interface, very clean and slick and quite easy to use. I had it running on a stock Pentium (166 at the time a very fast home computer) which basically means it was more powerful than the actual next machines.

    --
    I reject your reality ... and substitute my own.
  13. You are Steve Jobs by AngryLoneNut · · Score: 1

    Emmett, you are Steve Jobs. Just remove the glasses and wipe off your tan concealing geek makeup. You can't fool the AngryLoneNut.

  14. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    Exactly. :) At first, I didn't like Aqua either, thought it looked annoying. I didn't like (and still don't) using Aqua themes for Mac OS 8+ and GTK+/Enlightenment/Sawmill. They're annoying. But having used both DP3 and DP4 a fair amount, I find it fine to use, and not distracting.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  15. NeXT was my first UNIX... by kill+-9+$$ · · Score: 1
    I kinda wish I could go back and compare now but I don't have access to the computers at the university where I used it anymore.

    I remember liking it, and the stuff I didn't like about it was typically similar to the stuff I don't like in X-windows now. It'd be interesting to go back and give it a whirl.

    As for the price problem, I want to pose the following question to those who might know a bit more about NeXT than myself. I vaguely remember on the systems I used, that the hardware the OS was running on were Gateway 2000 boxes. Can the NeXT operating system run on x86 hardware? If so, was it the OS that was pricey or the actual NeXT hardware? (I'm thinking the latter) Also, if it does run on x86, does anyone know where I can get it for free or minimal cost, or is it totally dead?

    --

    -- A computer without COBOL and Fortran is like a piece of chocolate cake without ketchup and mustard
  16. Cube sizes by Gandalf_007 · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure if you can fit a full ATX in there, but certainly a microATX or 2/3 baby AT should fit just fine. In any case, you'll have to install your own power supply. As far as expansion bays, it has two full height 5-1/4 bays, which you can mount a floppy, hdd, zip and cdrom in with no problem (except for cutting holes in the front panel, and you'll need the "mounting rails" that let you put 3-1/2 inch disks in 5-1/4 slots. It wouldn't hurt to cut some cooling holes in the front, as the cube was designed to blow air out the optical slot (it actually flowed through the drive--there was a filter on the back of the drive).

    --

    "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
  17. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by santeri · · Score: 1
    The DSP never got used for anything intresting

    Uh, atleast my wife did a lot of hacking (all kinds of sound handling with C++, formerly they had used all Object C) with the NeXTs at the Department of Musicology (University of Helsinki) - great hardware for that purpose I was told.

    ______________

    --
    ______________
    OTTERS RULE.
  18. Re:So why did it fail? by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    linux on alpha has always been 64bit. you're getting confused by intel's (piece of crap) ia64.

    No... I wouldn't make that mistake, particularly since:

    I don't lust after Intel vapor

    I hold no interest in VLWI processors

    They've been talking about putting out the ia64, Itanium, whatever for ages

    It may never come out

    If it does it will probably be some horrible thing which attempts to do all and be all and have numerous bugs and run slow

    ...no, I wouldn't make that mistake, not a chance.

    Vote Naked 2000

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  19. Re:So why did it fail? by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 2
    Well, it was a cool computer. However, it had some failures that made it unattractive.
    • No disk drive -- at a time where most of the data exchange was still done on floppies.
    • To many gimmics and to little raw power for the price. Yes, the price was not to bad for the things build into it. But most people did not need e.g. CD quality sound as much as they needed cycles. SUN was a much better buy in this respect
    NeXTStep was excellent, but again, not what most people needed at the time. The multi-media age was still some time off, and most researchers were still writing text mode applications (hell, many are still doing it now).
    --

    Stephan

  20. Ross Perot? by ERICmurphy · · Score: 1

    Did anyone notice the picture of Ross Perot on this page: http://www.whichauction.net/fly/back_07.html ? In tiny type at the very bottom, it says that Ross Perot was a NeXT backer. Now I know for sure that the NeXT idea was a crazy one.

    --


    -- ERICmurphy -- www.jabber.org for open-source, XML-based IM
  21. OS X port to Intel? by 2quam4 · · Score: 1

    Understanding that OS X is essentially the 'next' Nextstep and I'm impressed by OS X features, I wonder what the probability is of Apple porting it to Intel? I guess slim, if I have a desire of actually purchasing an Apple (would be first since //e) to enjoy this fine looking OS. I guess thats what they want, more Mac purchases. But, if Apple would port it...

    1. Re:OS X port to Intel? by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      If the DOJ wins and Micros**t gets broken up, I think Apple will port, otherwise it would be suicide to go against B Gates.


      blessings,

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    2. Re:OS X port to Intel? by Snocone · · Score: 2

      I wonder what the probability is of Apple porting it to Intel? I guess slim,

      The chance of that is the chance that Itanium and/or Sledgehammer turn out to kick Power4's butt. I would put that as a good deal less than 'slim'.

      Oh, you meant the current processor generation? Right up there with Satan ordering snowmobiles, dude. Not absolutely impossible if somebody like Compaq makes an offer Apple can't refuse, though.

      I guess thats what they want, more Mac purchases.

      Yes. Apple is a hardware company. Many people miss this fundamental reality. Including Apple management, occassionally.

  22. Software features in NeXT are in upcoming OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    All the cool software tools that were on NeXT will be available on OS X when it comes out, for those of you who don't know. Objective C, Project Builder and the other RAD tools, etc. This was part of the deal when Apple bought it.

    OS X Beta this year, 1.0 early next year.

    It would be nice if this technology finally blossoms in the market. I don't think a dual-processor G4 will be as much of a hardware impediment as the NeXT's 25MHz 68030 was...

  23. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Okay, each person needs a home directory. The system has to manage between users. There are permissions to deal with, access limitations, the requirement that a lot of commands require root, etc. If the model was hugely simplified, (no ownership restrictions, only home-directory restrictions, all applications run at any level, etc) and it didn't add overhead to the system (no checking for access privliges on hardware) it might fly. But otherwise, it would probably be too much complexity for too little gain.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  24. Gates pegged a decade ago... by twisty · · Score: 5
    While the article is dated, it's funny to see the percpetion of Bill Gates a decade past, both by those who "get him" and those who don't...

    Ester Dysan in the article mentions that Gates would end up producing NeXT software because "he's a smart businessman." While that non sequitor placed him in a warm light of misplaced optimism, the suspected 'dark side' of his alterior motives, opposing the operating system he could not own, was dead on the money.

    My earliest memory of discovering "the Real Gates" came from the late eighties when watching Computer Chronicals on PBS. Before actually seeing Bill, I'd heard rumors that he must be some great software engineer, and that he used to "hold contests for programming business apps, so he could outpace them all with QuickBASIC." But the reality of his mindset was seen on the East versus West "Computer Bowl" around 1988. The three questions I saw him answer were very revealing:

    (1) "SPOOL" describes a queueing operation, such as sending a document to a printer device. What does the acronym SPOOL stand for?
    Gates: No clue.
    Answer: Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line.(Granted, it's understandable that such trivia could easily be missed, even though I knew it.)

    (2) MIDI is the standard for Musical Instruments Digital Interface... but How Many pins are in a MIDI plug?
    Gates: No clue.
    Answer: Five. (THIS is the man who claims he will bring us multimedia on the PCs? Has he ever LOOKED at multimedia instruments or technology?)

    (3) Who is the top earning CEO in the Computer Industry?
    Gates: "JOHN SCULLEY OF APPLE!" (Correct!)

    I think he may have even quoted the salary Sculley was making! It didn't take him a blink of an eye to issue that answer. It also took him only two more years to get that answer changed to "Bill Gates." From that point on, it was clear to me where Bill Gates "inventive" mind really is.

    1. Re:Gates pegged a decade ago... by freebe · · Score: 2
      Bill Gates: Since 1984, a contest has been held on usenet for the most unreable, creative, bizzar, but working C program. What is the name of this contest?

      Moderator: Contest held on usenet for the most bizzar C program, but one that works. Anybody want to give it a shot? Going Once, going twice. Got nothing to loose, give it a shot here somebody? (Ring) Alright, Jean-Louis Gassée...

      Jean-Louis: Windows.

      [Roar of Applause from audience]

      - Computer Bowl, 1993

      --

      Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

    2. Re:Gates pegged a decade ago... by SEE · · Score: 2

      Dyson said if the NeXT caught on, Gates would produce software for it, because he "is a good businessman."

      Since the NeXT never caught on, the prediction was never tested.

      Steven E. Ehrbar

  25. pragmatic, not revolutionary by jetson123 · · Score: 2
    Objective-C wasn't really "revolutionary". When it came out, Smalltalk had already been around for many years, there were Lisp machines, and lots of excellent languages and environments. All the important GUI and graphics concepts of NeXTStep also had existed in other environment before.

    Objective-C was a pragmatic attempt to bring at least some of that functionality to a world already dominated by a systems programming language called "C". The biggest problem with Objective-C was (and continues to be) that it inherited the unsafe nature of C.

    I think it would have been good for the industry for Objective-C and NeXT to catch on. It would have put the industry on a different trajectory. If Objective-C had been used widely, by now, the language would probably have evolved to be significantly safer, with C-like functionality restricted to specific, unsafe modules where needed.

    But the NeXT system did evolve and has found widespread acceptance, not at NeXT/Apple but at Sun. The closest predecessor to Java is not C++ but it's Objective-C: Java has much of the dynamic binding, reflection, and library from Objective-C and the NeXT. That's not really surprising either, since many of the people working on Java for the last few years came from the Smalltalk/Self and from the Objective-C communities.

  26. Re:So why did it fail? by cookieman · · Score: 1

    Read the article. There's the answer to you question. -> Short answer: Gates did not liked it (or else except it's own distorted creations).
    (Hey! I'm not trolling !)

    --
    Just another coder...
  27. Re:Inverse hostile takeover - complete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Shhhhh....
    That's the next model....
    That's supposed to be a secret.
    Now some poor sap's gonna lose his job.

  28. I miss the Services menu by wemmick · · Score: 1

    I programmed professionally under NeXTStep/OpenStep for eight years. While the development environment was nice, I've seen similar functionality in a few other environments now.

    What I have yet to see is a replication of the "Services" menu provided by the NeXTStep environment. Programmers would declare services provided by their application for particular types of selections (e.g. string, file, rtf text). All other NeXTStep apps have a Services menu item which is automatically populated by these services.

    For example, you're editing a document. Double-click a word to select, go to the Services menu and choose "Look up in Webster" -- which tells the Webster dictionary app to look up the word. The Terminal app provided a service building feature so that you could define a "wc" service.... select a bunch of text, click on the Services->Terminal->Word Count service and the results from wc appear.

    sigh

    --
    ___
    Cognitive Overflow
    more than yo
    1. Re:I miss the Services menu by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      ...which kinda makes you wonder if Apple bought NeXT - or if it was the other way around.

      Definitely, Apple owns NeXT. They've taken more time to port it (and dumb it down) to Mac than NeXT took to create the whole thing from scratch.


      blessings,

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    2. Re:I miss the Services menu by rabidMacBigot() · · Score: 1

      The services menu survives in MacOS X. In fact, so does Objective C, Project Builder, Mach, and many other NeXTisms which kinda makes you wonder if Apple bought NeXT - or if it was the other way around...

  29. Re:Who said it failed? by gig · · Score: 1

    Fair enough that you get your dig at Unix, but take a look at the NeXT and Win95 GUI's side by side sometime. Microsoft's ability to be unoriginal is almost inspiring.

  30. Next virtual interface by rice0067 · · Score: 1

    Due to a period of imense free time i decided to play with dhtml and do a virtual interface.. http://rice0067.dsl.visi.com/bill/next/index.html

    1. Re:Next virtual interface by rice0067 · · Score: 1

      also take a look at www.nextmuseum.com and most questions can be answerd at : http://www.nextmusuem.com/archive/html/english/ --ah.. too much next stuff for the day!

  31. Got 'em, baby! by MouseR · · Score: 2

    When Apple bought NeXT in december 1996 (actually, when NeXT let itself being bought by Apple), I knew it was for OpenStep, and had a fait idea of what was to take place. Being a Mac developer, I knew I had to start learning the inside-outs of this OS, so I searched on the web, and found orb.com (dont botter looking it up, the site is gone now) from which I bought my NeXT machine (literally).

    It's what's refered to as a "color slab". The actual model name os a "Color Station". The 25Mghz one, not the Turbo Station.

    It came with NeXTSTEP 3.3 pre-installed on a 400Megs HD w/ 16Megs of RAM. This machine actually could rival my PowerMac 8600/200 the Mac OS of the time (I can't remember what version it was... 7.5.5 maybe).

    When Apple introduced NeXTSTEP to the Mac community, it actually simply released OpenStep 4.2 for Intel to developers. It turns out that the CDs were fat-binaries that would also work on my color slab. I downloaded the installer floppy image to boot my machine with, and was able to install OpenStep 4.2 on there--for free. The machine has been running superbly ever since.

    I eventually bought a N2000 NeXT Laser Printer. The best 400DPI I have ever seen. Never has that printer, actually controled by the NeXT itself for PostScript rastering, ever failed to print anything I threw at it, regardless of the complexity of the image. By having installed CAPer on it, I can use this printer on my network like any regular Mac networked printer.

    I have just bought a first-generation NeXT Cube (N1000A) for the coolness factor. I'm picking it up tomorow, and am eager to spin it up. It should look pretty dandy on my desk, next to my color slab, original Mac II (rev A), PowerMac 8600/200, iMac DV/SE, Mac SE+20" mobius display and my (yes) Apple //c.

    Now, I just need another hub ...

    If you want to learn a bit more on the machines NeXT produced, check out this link.

  32. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by memph1st0 · · Score: 1

    I also attended a college - Allegheny College - that used NeXT for many years. In fact I worked at Technical and Network Services at college, and had to service these boxes for 2 years. Allegheny kept their next machines until 1998, and by that time they were getting pretty damn slow. But in the end, these machines were excellend on a college campus that was filled with not-too-bright computer users. Their UI had to have ranked high on the usability scale, and they had a easy to set up account system.

    Allegheny made a transition to a NT 4.0 Network During the Summer of 99, after a NT/OpenStep Dual boot network in the Summer of 98. Administration wanted an OS like they had at home, but the NT network has been nothing but a hassle to TNS. I must admit that the turbo color NeXT pizza boxes were a far better machine that the NT machines. NT is horrificly slower than the NeXT boxes were.

    While searching for a job after my graduation in May, I got an offer from a company in Chicago which wanted me to do OpenStep development, so there is still some action goin on in the NeXTStep/OpenStep scene.

  33. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by gig · · Score: 1

    Steve Jobs

    is a self-made billionaire
    started the first personal computer company
    rescued it 20 years later with all the tech and talent he had over at the NeXT
    owns and heads the first movie studio to release a full-length computer-animated movie (and if you think the business side of a movie studio doesn't matter, you don't know the movie business)
    has appeared on the cover of TIME magazine 3 or 4 times, including earlier this year.

    Yeah, I can see why there are a few posters here who can call Steve Jobs "unsuccessful".

    The only thing he's been involved with that could even pretend to be unsuccessful is NeXT, and that was only because it didn't meet its goals until years later (now) after being sold to another company. Most of the NeXT people are at Apple now, including the same CEO, and they're about to release a cube-shaped computer that runs Mac OS X. Financially, the sale to Apple kept it from being a money loser, didn't it? Where's the unsuccess? This guys one of the legends of Silicon Valley.

    Is it because he's a chick magnet that so many Slashdotters like to rag on him? I mean, this guy's been involved in creating a user friendly Unix for 15 years (the NeXT project started at Apple where it was called "Big Mac" and left with Steve in 1985). It's only this past year or two that the idea of a user friendly Unix crossed over from insane to sane, and here Apple is with Mac OS X.

    As far as giving all the credit for Apple to Woz, not to take anything away from the guy (he's a genius), but that's like saying the Rolling Stones are all Keith Richards and no Mick Jagger. I mean ... come ON.

  34. Re:dude! by Imperial+Tacohead · · Score: 1

    Man, your sig is a crime against humanity. You should fix it.

  35. Not sure by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

    I'll look into this...thanks. All of the source I've seen is labeled with the LGPL, so it should be OK.

  36. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT...to get rid of? by GianfrancoZola · · Score: 1

    I've got one sitting in the basement of my parents' house. It's a cube, 16MB RAM, 300MB or so hard drive, monitor, keyboard, mouse.

    It doesn't boot anymore, and I don't have the software for it (got it free from my alma mater), but it's quite possible that someone out there knows what to fix to make it boot. May only need a new battery, I dunno.

    Over a year ago it was working fine, but it needed the OS reinstalled. I moved it from a friend's room over to my apartment in his pickup--when we left it worked, when we arrived, it stopped working. No idea why. Tried new SIMMs, different cables, different HD, different keyboard, everything. Maybe something jarred loose on the way over?

    Anyway, the upshot is, if anyone's interested, I'm more than willing to part with it, and my folks want it out of their basement. I know this isn't eBay, but if you're interested in owning some NeXT hardware (a cube even!!), let me know...you may just be able to make the thing work again, too.

  37. How NeXTSTEP relates to OS/X by GoRK · · Score: 2

    I own several copies of NeXTSTEP/OpenSTEP for Intel and have found them fun platforms to tinker with although I have never had a reson to use it seriously.

    When I first saw/ran Rhapsody Alpha 1 or whatever it was over 2 years ago, I was pretty startled to see that it WAS OpenSTEP. The installer worked and looked exactly the same and supported exactly the same hardware on the X86 side as the release of OpenSTEP 4.2.

    Sadly, this was the first of only two alpha releases of OS/X for Intel before the project was shifted entirely to the PPC. Very dissapointing. Perhaps it's still secretly lurking behind the scenes at apple with the System7/X86 port.

    Granted, probalby almost all of the NeXT code has all been replaced by apple's own Darwin (BSD), etc. but the point is that OS/X has taken a very very very strong influence from NeXT as far as producing a UN*X based system with a very good GUI, etc etc.

    ~GoRK

  38. nope by wcb4 · · Score: 1

    Sorry .... have to disagree with you on this one ..... I think that title goes to THE Amiga.

    --
    I reject your reality ... and substitute my own.
    1. Re:nope by DGolden · · Score: 1

      Please don't lump the Amiga and Atari ST together.

      The Amiga was a *very* similar m68k-based unix-like platform to NeXT (except amiga had no true memory protection (big downer that, but it meant that the AmigaOS had near-realtime latencies and could use extremely fast message passing-by-reference to shunt data around.)).

      At a fraction of the price, it was just marketed by complete buffoons. CBM management actually managed to screw up a deal for the amiga A3000UX to become the low end Sun (or was it DEC?) workstation, but the Amiga still managed to dominate the video producton industry for a decade, despite CBM marketing's repeated attempts to sell it as a "games computer" in toy stores.

      The Amiga division was making a profit even as the parent company folded, but blithering-idiot CBM management continously pumped money out of amiga R&D and into marketing their over-hyped, under-specced CBM PC line.

      There's still features from AmigaOS I miss on Linux, mainly to do with the way the filesystem works (Assigns and Device handlers to let you cd into TCP connections, shell archives, windows and the like), the extra "screen" layer of UI abstraction that Enlightenment tries to emulate (the Rasterman is an ex-Amiga hacker), the system-wide REXX scripting, the way applications didn't spread themselves across about 10 different directories, and a load of other little niggling things, many of which are available as patches and add-ons into Linux, but on the Amiga, they all worked together seamlessly.

      The same can not really be said of the ST.

      The ST was kludged together from off-the-shelf parts in a cynical business decision by Atari, after CBM bought Amiga out from under their noses.

      Please see www.blizzard.u-net.com/AtoZ/history .html
      for a history of the amiga, www.amiga.org for amiga news, and www.amiga.com for information about the Tao/Amiga Virtual Processor technology.

      --
      Choice of masters is not freedom.
    2. Re:nope by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

      Both the Amiga and the Atari ST, although decent enough, we're not really on the same level. This was only partly because of the DSP hardware in and of itself. The MusicKit had a lot more to do with it. Powerful yet easy-to-use realtime DSP (a la Capybara/Kyma combo) is mind-blowingly useful.

  39. Innovations related to NeXTSTEP by andyturk · · Score: 2

    I spent many, many years in the NeXTSTEP community (through all the spellings of the name :-).

    Lots of great technology came out of that world and the people who drank the kool aid.

    Almost everyone still thinks NeXTSTEP had a beautiful user interface. WebTV also has a great UI. The same designer created both.

    The CERN web server was originally created on NeXTSTEP.

    Netscape's IFC (pure Java UI) were created by folks who came from NeXT. The IFC classes later got incorporated into Swing, Sun's current (and arguably goofy) UI library for Java.

    I'm sure there are lots of other projects that had their origin at NeXT too. At the time, Steve Jobs was able to attract a lot of *very* smart people to his vision.

    Unfortunately, none of it turned out to be interesting enough to displace Windows.

    1. Re:Innovations related to NeXTSTEP by hostmaster · · Score: 1
      Doom was developed on NeXT as well.

      Tim Berners-Lee as noted above, developed the WWW as a test project on a NeXT machine (which was specifically acquired for the purpose). I actually have a running copy of the world's first web-browse (called www) on my NeXT. It was a proof of concept app written by TBL. I think CERN still has it on their ftp site.

      One of NeXT's biggest customers was the NSA. Apparently they had built some sort of cluster of NeXT machines and were running some crypto on it. I remember when they dumped all their hardware (must have been around '97) and the market for used NeXT's tanked.

      The Dimension board was very cool, 32 bit color and 16MB of video RAM back in the early 90's and you could watch TV with it on your 20" Hitachi.

      One of the other large NeXT customers was the bank I work for. In fact we are still one of the largest OpenStep shops in the world.

      If I remember my quotes from Randall Stross's Steve Jobs and the NeXT Big Thing correctly, Gates told Jobs he would never port Word to a machine that had sold less than a million units. BTW, the link above is to Amazon, and it has a review of the book I wrote a while ago, on re-reading the review, I must say it's quite good. Stross' book is a great read for people who're interested in NeXT.

      --
      -- Equity lord of the Trill Consortium
  40. Re:The more things change... by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Bill G. Has written lots of products for *NIX. As far as I can remember, COM is already available on UNIX, and various Micrsoft backend products have been ported to UNIX.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  41. Re:Apps for Next boxes by be-fan · · Score: 1

    As I remember, they were pretty big for 3D and graphics.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  42. Re:The more things change... by Anarkhia · · Score: 1

    Microsoft has already developed Internet Explorer for Solaris and HP. (And it's not that bad of a port, too)

  43. So why did it fail? by meadowsp · · Score: 2

    So people, why did it fail and what lessons can we learn from it?

    I did actually get to use a Next box at the time, and I've still got fond memory's of it, but it goes to show that we need more than "cool tech" and a good UI to suceed.

    1. Re:So why did it fail? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Where have you been for the last 5 years ??? Linux on alpha is 64bit from 1995 :-)

      Under the impression the Kernal was still 32 bit, although you could do a build with a 64 bit compiler...

      Is it a 64 bit kernal already, on alpha? I thought Linus was working on the new 64 bit kernal this year at this year.

      Vote Naked 2000

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:So why did it fail? by carlos_benj · · Score: 2

      I have a Next box (complete with original invoice). Maybe it was the price. $17k US with a printer and a modem and this was the low end machine. There is a significant coolness factor even today, but not at that price.

      --

      --

      As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

    3. Re:So why did it fail? by be-fan · · Score: 2

      That is redundant. For a product like the NeXT machine, failing by definition means no market penetration. Again saying that Intel's products are sucessful because they have deep market penetration (that sound strangely erotic...) is redundant. Something causes them to have deep market penetration and that is why they are succesful. For example, good marketing causes them to be sucessful.

      Also, Intel survives on technical merit. The competing product are more expensive, and until recently, Intel had the highest performance in the x86 arena.

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    4. Re:So why did it fail? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      ntel, Microsoft and their respective products survive not because of their technical merits, but because of their deep market penetration

      Boy, is that the truth. Though Intel is having a rough time of it from AMD. Say what you like about AMD, they at least deliver the processors they say they will.

      Technical merits of Microsoft? Nope, can't think of any.

      [Yes] [No] [Cancel] Send this message?
      [Yes] [No] [Cancel] Are you sure you want to do that?
      [Yes] [No] [Cancel] Do you think being second guessed by a box says something about lack of respect for your decisions?
      [Yes] [No] [Cancel] Take your Prozac today?


      Vote Naked 2000

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:So why did it fail? by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      I remember how extreme it was to buy one. I went the 'registered developer' route with my cube. They refused to sell developers one without a hard disk. Having a 300 megabyte hard disk on the cube added more than $1,000 to the price.

      Later, my friend and I wanted to sell machines for vertical market (driving imagesetters) and found it was hopeless. The process to get permission to sell their machines completely weeded out anybody of the start-up ilk.

      It was a couple of years before I saw any machines for sale at a retail outlet. Jobs is still strangely picky about who he allows to sell his computers.


      blessings,

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    6. Re:So why did it fail? by homer_ca · · Score: 1
      Linux isn't really a new platform and the only reason it survives is that it's free, entirely optional, and doesn't require a revenue stream.

      Don't forget a plentiful supply of cheap commodity hardware. Or even free hardware if you catch someone throwing out a 486.
    7. Re:So why did it fail? by Imabug · · Score: 2

      The first NeXT cubes were pretty pricey, but later NeXTstations were pretty competitive (around the 3-4K range, much cheaper most other workstation class computers at the time).

      My personal feeling is that NeXT's target market was too narrow and upgradeability was limited. About the only place you could buy one was through a university bookstore. This kind of limits the availability (how many university students can afford to shell out 4k for a really cool workstation). And at most university bookstores (that i've been in anyway), computer purchases are limited to students and academic faculty, so joe computer user isn't going to be able to walk in and purchase one, no matter how cool he thinks it is.

      CPU wasn't upgradable (soldered to the MB in earlier versions), so the slabs (even the Turbostations) were quickly left behind when CPU speeds increased.

      As far as being too different, the GUI was light years head of Windows 3.x and even MacOS at the time. It was easier to learn, and based on a BSDish Mach kernel. It was definitely ahead of it's time, but reached too small an audience for it to ever achieve a piece of the market.

      i still love my NeXT slab. The NeXT will always be my all time favourite system.

      imabug

      --
      "For I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and Long Words Bother Me"
    8. Re:So why did it fail? by SEE · · Score: 2

      It didn't have a floppy drive. It started overpriced. It was dependent on a programming language which was never adopted in large numbers. There was no specific job for which it was more effective than other available options, leaving it with no way to "cross the chasm", and it was incompatible with everything.

      However, it hasn't failed completely yet. NeXT's operating system is the ancestor of MacOS X much like Windows 3.0 and DOS are the ancestors of Windows 98.

      Steven E. Ehrbar

    9. Re:So why did it fail? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      How could it not fail?

      When I looked into buying a NeXT I was dismayed that I would have to drive 100+ miles to see one, demonstrating a lack of a dealer network. I seem to recall Apple was having a bad time of it and most computer dealers in my neck of the woods were wary. These people had to but bread on the table and were being clobbered by the early clone shops. Three dealers in town were buying x86 mobos and parts and assembling clones to sell for far less than a Mac, this in a city with one Mac store, with a large staff, watching its sales errode.

      To their credit, the Mac is still around due to the wisdom of collaboration with education. I work in a county office of education, with conferences going all the time and hear Mac this Mac that, I think the Cube will be very popular as it's asthetically pleasing, one thing Jobs crew is doing right, make a sexy looking computer.

      Vote Naked 2000

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    10. Re:So why did it fail? by redhed · · Score: 1
      NeXT's hardware and software units "failed" (in that they stopped existing) at different times, and I think you could say for different reasons.

      The hardware failed because, as so many have pointed out, it wasn't cost-competitive -- didn't give enough bang for the buck. Better marketing might have helped, not by doing a better spin job or finding fancier words and pictures, but by correctly analyzing a market need, helping Engineering shape the product to that need, and then winning that market. However, given the small volumes the NeXT cubes and workstations were being produced in, it's hard to imagine that even with the right product for the right people at the right time, they could have made it at the right price.

      Also, part of being cost-competitive would have been having the right software infrastructure -- all those developers who could make software for this hardware. Anyone who has ever ported commercial software to multiple platforms knows that the effort could kill you. NeXT tried to have a developer program, but resources were thin. (Moreover, if you believe that Microsoft has at times improperly wielded monopoly power, this would be a good time to insert your thoughts on whether there were other reasons developers didn't port programs to NeXTSTEP.)

      The software company, which survived the end of the hardware, failed because the company couldn't come up with a workable market strategy. Also, there was a lot of pressure to succeed fast, and so there was a lot of switching strategies without waiting to see if what was in place was working. Education, business, enterprise solutions, whatever -- all were tried and none stuck. There was a lot of turnover in the marketing dept in those days.

      The good news is that Apple seems not to be having any of these problems. I would like to think that Steve and crew learned from their years in Redwood City, and that they are also listening to the advice of the marketing gurus who were already at Apple. It seems to be working so far.

      On a different line: You could say that the company didn't "fail" at all, given that so many remember it and so many products have already descended from it. Its legacy lives on.

    11. Re:So why did it fail? by heh2k · · Score: 1

      linux on alpha has always been 64bit. you're getting confused by intel's (piece of crap) ia64.

    12. Re:So why did it fail? by SEWilco · · Score: 1
      At the time, about half of the Unix-aware people to whom I spoke really liked the NeXT. Merely the large-capacity removable disk was wonderful, and the rest was really nice. It was the price that stopped most people.

      I did see one on eBay last night, if you want one now...

    13. Re:So why did it fail? by Gleef · · Score: 2

      NeXT failed because:
      * It cost too much
      * The drive was too slow in the first version
      * It was a little too different from the rest of the workstation market at the time for the target market (Universities and Colleges) to be comfortable with it
      * Sun had more effective marketing in the target market at the time

      In short, it failed primarily because it was ahead of its time, and secondarily because of the whims of a competitive market.

      ----

      --

      ----
      Open mind, insert foot.
    14. Re:So why did it fail? by wljones · · Score: 1

      The short answer at the time was,"Processor of a micro, price of a mini, distribution of a main frame". Also, at the time, several computers died in the market because they lacked a color monitor. No color meant no sale. Color was added to the Next, but the originals did not have it and it came too late to save the machine. Also, Steve Jobs made the same mistake that brought down Ken Olsen of DEC, another brilliant man. Both men had the attitude,"Do it my way or not at all." The market does not like this attitude, and will look for an alternate solution as soon as possible. In the case of Ken Olsen, that was several years.

    15. Re:So why did it fail? by spondylus · · Score: 1
      I used one for a while, and initially thought it the coolest thing since sliced bread. But the more I used it, the more I was using it to open up a bunch of xterms (or whatever they called it, I forget). Plain old twm was quicker for that, so I gradually drifted over to the Suns and RS6000s. And if I were actually thinking of buying the thing (as opposed to using it on campus), it would have been way too expensive. I do like the NeXT-inspired AfterStep WM, though, at least the early ones which were still small and lithe (and I cut my teeth on a Mac!).

      But you're right,of course, "cool tech" and a good UI (whatever that is) isn't enough. Good marketing sense is necessary, even at the expense of "technical purity." Look at DEC, brilliant tech company, lame marketing company, now owned by a PC maker. On the other extreme there are MS and Intel. Either that or change the rules, like Linux.

    16. Re:So why did it fail? by 4season · · Score: 1

      I bought a NeXTcube and NeXT laser printer for around $3,000 when BusinessLand was closing their doors. I loved the looks of the hardware and GUI and still think that a cast-magnesium housing is a really cool idea--almost no RFI emissions at all!

      Problems:
      1. Expensive to buy new
      2. Expensive to upgrade-remember the $500 external SCSI PLI 2.88M floppy drive? Newer Turbo Cubes got an internal floppy but NeXT wouldn't sell the necessary parts to upgrade the original.
      3. Proprietary everything: We really never saw a 3rd party market develop for replacement mice, monitors, printers or keyboards.
      4. Expensive, limited selection of software, much of it pretty but weak compared to their Mac counterparts.
      5. No easy way to distribute new software: I forgot how much a floptical cost but think it would be worse than distributing new software on a Jaz disk these days.
      6. Lots of emphasis on network connectivity but kind of fussy for plain ole dialup connections

      In the end, I decided that the NeXT owner's club was just too exclusive for it's own good and though it crashed too much, I had a better time using my brand-new Powerbook 100: Inferior technology, but more polished and cheaper.

      Today I run Red Hat Linux on an ATX box that I assembled myself: I paid around $15 for the floppy drive. Computing is fun again because it seems like all of the old-time Mac community creativity has turned to Linux. The only thing I miss about NeXT is the style of the black hardware.

    17. Re:So why did it fail? by erice · · Score: 1

      1) It was too expensive for the desktop market.
      2) It was too slow to be a workstation. The 680(30|40) wasn't anywhere close to the RISC workstations of the time.
      3) It was too late to have a chance. The last successful new platform was Macintosh. Linux isn't really a new platform and the only reason it survives is that it's free, entirely optional, and doesn't require a revenue stream.

    18. Re:So why did it fail? by T-Punkt · · Score: 1

      > Short answer: Gates did no liked it
      > (Hey! I'm not trolling !)
      No, not at all. Gates has the power to kill products he doesn't like and did so in the past.

      E.g. with Digital's DNARD (aka "Shark") wich could have become a real cool Network Computer. But Gates: "Kill it or you won't get NT for your Alphas anymore"...

      (Usually he/Microsoft just buys the company and let the product dissapear)

    19. Re:So why did it fail? by ackthpt · · Score: 1

      Speaking of DEC... I've lusted after an alpha for years. Why fool with these lame 32bit systems?

      I read something about a new 64bit kernel due out this summer (2.2?) which would be the thing to take advantage of a true workstation like an alpha.

      A little background on my computers/usage: Cut teeth on OSI 800 board (yeah, 8k of ram, 6502), C64, Apple ][, Amiga 1000 & 2000, SparcIPX with Linux. I didn't buy an x86 machine until getting a Sony VAIO laptop until last year. Windows is so slow it's like punishment to use.

      Vote Naked 2000

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    20. Re:So why did it fail? by barracg8 · · Score: 1
      The only thing I miss about NeXT is the style of the black hardware

      Ring Dell. Say you have their spring 2000 catalogue, and ask about bundle code BLK19. (btw. I don't work for them, just their catalogue is in front of me) $499 for a black mouse (logitech), black keyboard (belkin), and black 19" .26mm Viewsonic monitor, res up to 1600x1280. By the look of it, it comes with speakers, too (black).

      Now all you need is the case. I've taken a can of spray paint to my computer before now. Cost: $5-$10? [actually, I agree, jet black computer hardware is cool. I've taken a can of black spray paint to a keyboard before now, but that was less NeXT style, more hitchhikers guide to the galaxy.]

      :-)

      G

  44. Re:NeXT BEFORE XWindows by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 2

    Your statements do not correspond to my memory.

    In 1990, when I started at CMU, we had:

    * A room of Sun 3/35 systems running X (these were older machines even for the time, at least 2 or 3 years old. The first Unix system I ever logged onto was one of these.)

    * A shitload of Digital DECstation 3100 machines running X

    * Lots of other Unix boxes running X in various departments (I remember a couple of IBM RT's that were very slow but also ran X)

    * One room of NeXT cubes that never got any use. The only time I used them was when all of the cluster DECstations were in use and I needed a telnet prompt to play MUDs.

    I don't know what year X started becoming widespread, but it was certainly a couple of years at least before 1990, and at the time of NeXT's introduction in '88, was probably pretty widespread already.

    BTW, X development started in '85 as well. So even if NeXT development did start in '85 (which I doubt), then it wouldn't be before X, it would have started around the same time as X.

  45. You can use it now by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1
    You can go install GNUstep now and go for it. We've just had our latest release (0.6.6) and things are becoming stable enough to begin writing applications. We desperately need more end-user software. We have an alpha version of a GL framework (GNU 3DKit) and work is being done on an IB clone called GORM (it's currently available in the GNUstep CVS) and a PB clone called ProjectCenter that will be available here. There are a few other applications available as well. Any efforts to port existing Objective C applications to GNUstep are also appreciated. I'd like to see a good modern web browser written for GNUstep.

    Currently, you can write applications with the developers release of MOSX or with an old OPENSTEP box and then convert the nib files to gmodels. This is the way ProjectCenter and the 3DKit are being written. We would really appreciate any and all interest.

    1. Re:You can use it now by smart2000 · · Score: 1
      The most importatnt Pmni frameworks (OmniBase, OmniFoudation, OmniNetworking) have allready been ported to GNUstep, and I use them on a daily basis under linux. They work fine under GNUstep.

      GNUstep is LGPL.

      --
      To purchase it is not like spending money but rather it is an investment in the future in a blow against the empire
    2. Re:You can use it now by RevAaron · · Score: 2

      Doesn't Omni have a couple of the frameworks on which OmniWeb is dependent available, open-source style? Perhaps if someone ported those first to GNUstep, OmniWeb would be willing to do a port (or allow someone, under NDA) of OmniWeb, which is a great browser. Or would that violate the license of GNUstep? I cannot recall if it's GPL or LGPL.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  46. NeXT was killed by the Foonly Effect by Dr.+Zowie · · Score: 2
    The real, overriding problem with the next platform wasn't its hardware -- it was the crappy release schedule. At the time it came out, I was at Reed College, one of the development and prototype centers. We had access to some of the very first NeXTs to come off the assembly line, at release level 0.7 or something. By 0.8 I started playing with it because they kicked the pants off of everything else we had for raw power (this was the fall of 1988 and winter of 1989), and I was learning about fluid dynamic simulation.

    The problem was: the graphical interface on the top was buggy as anything (at least in 0.8). I never used it. That caused trouble, because when someone sat down and logged in at the console the average time to live was only about three minutes before the kernel panicked. That didn't keep me from running my fluid dynamic simulations on 'em -- a single NeXT could almost keep pace with a dedicated VAX 11/785 running my fluid code.

    Along about April or so of 1989, we got our first Decstation 3100, which in turn kicked the pants off the NeXT boxen. Then it was all over but the shouting: they'd taken so long to get NeXTStep finished that their hardware had fallen a generation behind.

    IIRC, NeXT boxen weren't released commercially until fall 1989 or winter 1990 -- by which time, DEC was already announcing their 5000 series workstations and SUN had leapfrogged the NeXTs too.

    Foonly effect all the way -- they just hadda keep tweaking to get the perfect graphics system, and by the time they were done with perfection it was too late. If they'd only been able to go to full production in the fall of 1988 instead of 1989, we'd have seen NeXT boxen everywhere and they'd have had the market-share oomph to run with the big dogs. C'est la vie.

    Anyone remember Kaypro? Wildly successful luggable-computer company that died for related reasons...

    1. Re:NeXT was killed by the Foonly Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ME TOO! I was at Reed College beginning in Sept 91, and those very NeXT boxen were the foundation for my entire IT career. Seriously.

      In the computer lab in the basment of the library, there were two rooms filled with 50 or so Mac SE's - 9" B&W screens, slower than a sloth on qualuudes, etc. In the far corner were a half dozen majestic black beasts, with HUGE displays, grayscale images, two mouse buttons, surrounded by a pantheon of True Hackers (who spent most of thier time playing NetTrek). It was immediately clear who the cool kids were, and I wanted to be one. I am a sysadmin today because of that original NeXT experience. Hell, I still remember my password for those boxen. Years later, I ran across one of those ur-hackers I looked up to working as sysadmin at the Santa Fe Institute.

      In Sept '91 at Reed, Jobs gave the speech to kick off the academic year. I attedended, but for the life of me, I can't remember anything but his anecdote about turning orange after eating too many carrots at the nearby Krishna center. There was also a scuplture in the quad between Commons and Anna Mann house which was a big black iron cube - on the day of Job's address, it was transformed into the NeXT logo with colored masking tape.

      Yep, I am "me" in some measure due to the NeXT boxes there at Reed.

  47. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by leko · · Score: 1

    One of the cool things about the CMU deal with NeXT was that we had a lot, and therefore there are a lot floating around. I managed to get a slab with a 400mb harddrive and 32mb of ram for free.

    That thing sat in the lounge of my hall for people to browse webpages and check mail, it had an uptime of 180 or so days when I had to leave for the summer.

  48. Mac OS NeXt by MadAhab · · Score: 1
    After using WindowMaker for a while (and for my laptop I prefer it to the 50 processes and squanderous memory of Gnome/KDE), I saw clearly the NeXt heritage coming through in MacOS X, especially all the little icons collecting on the bottom of the screen.

    Now with a cube, it's pretty clear that the return of Jobs is partially because he wants to vindicate his unfulfilled NeXt dreams of the past...

    Boss of nothin. Big deal.
    Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.

    --
    Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
  49. Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by 13013dobbs · · Score: 1

    I think Jobs has come up with some wonderful stuff, both hardware and software. However he (or the company) always seems to mess things up in the end. Is there and one stage that Jobs keeps messing up on? While I like the mac, I am not a die-hard mac fan, so I don't know all the little details.

    --

    No replies made to AC posts. Please log in.

    1. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by DrWiggy · · Score: 2

      1. You don't have to wear a suit to be a suit.

      2. His companies always slightly under-perform where you think a company with the products, creativity and mindset that places like Apple should be. Think about the companies he's been involved in, compare them to comparatively no-brainer outfits that don't require that level of creativity (Yahoo, Amazon), go figure.

      I'm not saying this is all bad, I'm just answering the question of the previous poster as to why Jobs always seems to fail.

    2. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by cameloid · · Score: 2

      It's probably more to do with NeXT (is that right?), Apple etc coming up with stuff too early sometimes. I mean Apple made a PC GUI that was too expensive, and still is a bit (at least I can't afford one yet). The Newton was too early, and I've never had much success with this Mac voice recognition stuff yet. NeXT was science fiction at the time.

      They always seem to foul up by trying to sell stuff that people don't realise they need yet.

      I don't know whether Jobs is a visionary, or whether he just sees things ^_^

      Quite a bit of stuff that Apple comes up with generally gets, er, copied by other companies. the last modem I bought for my PC was transparent blue, for some reason.

      What Jobs needs to do is get his timing right. He needs to launch stuff, not years ahead of their time, but a few days. Or weeks at the most.

      It's all a matter of timing.

      --
      -- Cisk for the Cisk God
    3. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by 3danim8tor · · Score: 1

      Yea PIXAR has done great. Like you said its mostly Lasseters work. But Jobs also didnt start PIXAR he bought it off of Lucas I in 1983. Its also known that he stated that he does not get involved at all in PIXAR's daily work. He just makes sure the business end is going smoothly.

    4. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Pig+Bodine · · Score: 1
      I've seen little from the Jobs camp apart from spin and the ability to have smart techs around him a lot of the time that come up with cool stuff.

      That's what I give him credit for. He seems to have a rare knack for finding people with good ideas. He may (or may not) be an asshole and what he does may not be as cool as being a master hardware hacker like Woz, but compared to all the companies that succeed with no interesting ideas at all, Jobs does seem to have some cool instincts on what ideas to support. His failures have been more interesting than most people's successes. (And Apple doesn't really seem to be failing anymore.)

    5. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Darchmare · · Score: 2

      Maybe, maybe not. Putting your nationalism aside, though, can you say that it's a dumb person who knows how to sell to those 'morons'?

      I don't see anyone else doing it, at least not at the same scale.

      - Jeff A. Campbell
      - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)

      --

      - Jeff
    6. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Master+Bait · · Score: 1
      Jobs succeeded very well with NeXT. He was smart enough to get out of the hardware business and port NeXTStep to PC Intel.

      And he got filthy rich when he sold NeXT to Apple!


      blessings,

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    7. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Zoop · · Score: 3

      > Jobs messes up, because he isn't actually that good at the job

      Like most posts about Apple on Slashdot, I can see how someone would think that 5 or 10 years ago (you know, before Linux and Windows 95), but read a bloody paper. Have you seen the way Apple runs now? Have you seen their financial statements? Have you seen their stock performance?

      When Jobs took over at Apple, I was suspicious that it was the end, but I was proved wrong. What bothers me about this post is that it has been widely reported with data to boot and this guy still isn't aware that not only is the company making money, but it's making a lot of money. Most of that money comes from out-Dell-ing Dell on how to run a computer manufacturing company. Has everything Jobs done been successful? Far from it. But geez, read a freakin' paper.

    8. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by CrazyJoel · · Score: 1

      "the Jobsian Reality Distortion Field."

      Wasn't that an Illuminatus card?

      joel

      --

      Such is the infinite Grace of Popeye.
    9. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Fervent · · Score: 1
      I find this topic interesting, partly because I switch from PC fantacism to Apple "wow that's cool-looking" comments around the time of every MacExpo.

      If you read Steven Levy's book "Hackers", though, you'll notice that nearly every technical decision (those that revolutionized the industry; for example, using the original Apple's CPU to do only half the graphics work necessary by "spinning" the pixels onto the screen) were made by Woz. Woz gets overappreciated sometimes but it's hard to argue with his results. He's a true hacker: one who loves taking apart and analysing machines for the fun of it. Jobs seems to provide only the marketing muscle.

      (While I'm on the subject, let's go Offtopic for a while. Ever noticed that hackers today go to unnecessarily extraordinary lengths to break systems and construct ultra-secure systems for themselves? It wasn't always that way. Levy talks about the first timeshare machine, and how it was purposely designed so that every file on the "server" could be read by every "user". There were passwords, but only for the system to identify who you were. Otherwise it was like an open tape drawer: an invitation to view the works of your comrades, change them and make them better. My, has the hacker mentality changed.

      --

      - I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.

    10. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Zimm · · Score: 1

      We have to remeber that Jobs isn't an engineer, he's the front man for his company. All of the inovation that comes from within Apple, Next, Pixar, are from the employees that work there. Jobs is good about hiring smart people with good ideas, they may not be his ideas, but he is smart enough to sometimes see them. Jobs is such a big personality, that we sometimes think his companies are just a one man show.

    11. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by iphayd · · Score: 1

      Actually, Woz could have cared less if the Apple ][ ran out of a cardboard box, or just open. He was the engineering genious that it needed to be a viable computer.

      Jobs put it in a plastic case that made it something that _could_ be sold to the masses.

      Jobs should not be discounted for this. It took both of them to spark the computer revolution, just like it took Jobs' flair for elegance to spark the resurgence into the Mac Market.

      On another note...

      Mac OS X _IS_ NeXTSTEP rebranded. Obj C is there, most NeXTSTEP programs run under it, and it is wicked fast on a single G4, not to mention its SMP support for the dual G4.

    12. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by DrWiggy · · Score: 4

      I thought that it was people like Woz that came up with the really cool stuff, and Jobs was just the man in the suit who sells it to the masses...

      I think the problem with Jobs is that he has suffered from a syndrome that he shares with Richard Branson. Because the companies he works for and has helped build are relatively high-profile in terms of branding and advertising, there is a media perception that he must be successful. In fact, Branson's companies aren't making profit at all but people perceive Virgin to be a success, and similarly people thought Apple was a great success when in fact whilst he was there the first time, it's fiscals didn't look anywhere near as good as they should have done.

      Jobs messes up, because he isn't actually that good at the job - because the media have told you he's wonderful and it's just that everybody else is out to get him, you believe that he is indeed wonderful.

      I know I'm going to get flamed to hell for this from the die-hard Mac fans out there, but sorry, I just don't think that spin makes up for substance and as yet I've seen little from the Jobs camp apart from spin and the ability to have smart techs around him a lot of the time that come up with cool stuff.

    13. Re:Does Jobs bugger everything all to hell? by Darchmare · · Score: 2

      ---
      I guess this explains the 95% Windows's/PC marketshare then?
      ---

      Probably. Remember, we're not talking about technical merit at all. We're talking about individuals - it's hard to say Jobs is a moron, given that iMacs are selling like crazy. Gates isn't a moron either, at least when it comes to business. Bankrupt morals and poor product quality? Sure, but we weren't talking about that were we?

      Anyhow, just so you know, Windows is the majority OS outside of the US as well. Kind of blows your 'Americans suck' theory out of the water (not to say that we don't suck overall, but I think it's an issue with the human race in general).

      - Jeff A. Campbell
      - VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com)

      --

      - Jeff
  50. GNUstep by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

    GNUstep is actually doing quite well. It's just that the news about it never seems to leak out. We're actively tracking Cocoa (I'm writing an NSSound implementation in my spare time) and there are several important applications (a Workspace clone, an IB clone, a PB clone) in development. There is also an alpha version of a GNU 3DKit available. If you can help us write (or port) end-user applications, please do. It's ripe for the picking.

  51. Black Hardware by maeglin · · Score: 2

    I think the coolest thing about my NeXTStation is how solid it is.. It just feels...well solid. Things fit tightly, thick metal shielding, etc.. For being relatively lightweight, I think if dropped it would damage whatever it hit more that the box itself..

    Now, on the flip side, the monitor weighs 50 lbs..

    1. Re:Black Hardware by Strider- · · Score: 1

      I know what you mean. :) I own an '030 Cube, an '040 Cube, a Slab, a Turbo Slab, and the 400dpi LaserPrinter (all in working/mint condition). The amazing thing is that while this equipment is ancient, it still feels relatively nimble. I am also amazed at how well NeXTStep and OpenStep integrate with the rest of my home network (Linux based). I have full NIS logins, and all home directories are NFS mounted.. I'm constantly amazed by this OS.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    2. Re:Black Hardware by sabine · · Score: 1

      If they start making Mac cubes in black and implement more of NeXTStep...I am so there. goth computers. mmmmmm

  52. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by Mr+Neutron · · Score: 3
    But the software, oh man was that software ahead of it's time...

    Specifically: NeXT leveraged the run-time-binding in Objective-C to create InterfaceBuilder (IB). IB allowed the programmer to create a UI by dragging and dropping interface objects. Yes, a lot of tools do that, but IB was different in that it wasn't a code generator per se. IB created a "nib" file that basically "freeze dried" the UI objects and their relationships. You dragged and dropped your buttons and text fields and other widgets, then you dragged connections between them and clicked radio buttons to specify which methods the buttons would invoke. Very slick, very fast and you didn't have to tromp through a bunch of Obj-C source to make changes. (You could even hack the UIs of apps without needing the source!) A brilliant tool for constructing "mission critical custom apps," which NeXT finally determined was its true calling. I remember watching a video of the 1992 (I think) NeXTWORLD keynote where the Steve used IB to query a database and display the result (including a tiff, IIRC) without "writing any code..." Wow.

    So what killed NeXT? High prices, lack of standardization with the X community, and (ultimately) the Web. Even after they killed their hardware in 1992 and went x86, the developer version of the software cost $3K-$5K/seat. IB and its integrated editor-debugger-source-manager ProjectBuilder were great for building client-server apps, but the three-tier world marginalized them. WebObjects (their middle-tier software, now offered by Apple) is supposed to be pretty good but has a pretty limited following.

    I have my NeXTstation in the basement and have many fond memories of late-night hacking on it. The spirit lives on in GNUstep. The software lives on as Mac OS X Server but latest word has it that Obj-C has been deprecated in favor of Java, at least for WebObjects.

    Neutron

    --
    I get my kicks above the .sigline, Sunshine.
  53. Re:After the article... by marphod · · Score: 5

    The NeXT failed for a lot of different reasons. Mostly economic.

    While the NeXT was revolutionary, its cost per performance was iffy. The magnesium cases were way cool, but they cost a lot. As did the rest of the NeXT hardware. As other posters have said, the other workstations of the era (Sun 1+?, Apollo 3k&4k, Cybers, etc.) were as fast, or faster, and cost less. NeXTStep had the software down, but it was aimed at educational institutions. Which is all well, and good, but its hard to maintain a company on edu discount sold machines. The return from the discount is years off, and it doesn't sell enough units toi remain afloat long.

    There are other issues; the NeXT used display postscript, instead of X, as the GUI. there were X servers for NeXTStep, but they were slower than a native server would have been, and the other native apps being 'like'; but not always the same as other platform equivelents hurt the platform.

    It was also the era where, for whatever reason, Sun was king. it was the default platform to develop for, and a lot of 'cross compatable' software was really SunOS only (much like a lot of platform compatable software now only natively compiles on Linux, but thats neither here nor there).

    NeXT was also slow to innovate. In its lifetime, there were only a handful of different models made, they were slow on the release cycle and were behind the pace - other manifactures would come out with their bigger and better machines first.

    Another kicker is that while the NeXT was a cool as beans desktop machine, as a remote system it was nothing out of the ordinary. it was almost a standard unix shell, which lost to Apollo as Domain/OS was very spiffy in ways that unix can only dream about now, and to Sun on the cost and compatablity issue.

    Eventually, NeXT stopped producing their own hardware, and went just to working on the OS. Hardware is expensive and has low margins, comparatibvely, but, at least IMO, no company can support themselves based on an OS alone. Be, for example, is viable now, but they lost a lot of momentum when they gave up the BeBoxes (and I'm not convinced they will last, either). The OS petered around for a few years, and NeXT made semi-regular releases for a while, but a lot of what they had that was unique, besides the GUI look-and-feel, was done elsewhere, nearly as good, for free OSes(or effectively free, if its the OS the machine shipped with).

    So, there are a number of reasons NeXT failed. A poor long term business plan, a loss of momentum after the hardware branch was dropped, slow to meet new technologies. Probably other reasons, as well.

  54. Re:Attn. Solaris Users by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    No, OpenStep for Solaris for will not work with Linux. It doesn't include a Display PostScript server, but relies on the DPS extensions of Sun's X Server. Also, OpenStep for Solaris only works with Solaris on SPARC hardware, not Intel, and iBCS does emulate SPARC processor. I doubt it'd work with Display GhostScript as a substitution, but those of you using Linux on a SPARC might want to try it. It's kind of neet to try, but is of limited usefulness. Even though you can run X and OpenStep apps side by side on OpenStep/Solaris, they don't integrate that well, and a lot of OpenStep apps are only distributed for OpenStep/Mach for black and white (m68k/intel) boxes.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  55. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    $25?! Good lord! I payed $250 for my cube (mono and non-turbo) about a year ago... Like old Macs (as opposed to old PCs), they still can pull in a pretty fair price.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  56. Re:Attn. Solaris Users by freebe · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I thought that it did include the DPS server. I said Linux(Sparc), not Linux(other). DGS should actually work with it - it's fairly complete. This is just to give those with access to Solaris a hint at what OpenStep was like.

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  57. Amiga by dwalsh · · Score: 1

    As a former Amiga owner, my take on the demise of that radical machine is that it was manufactured by a company who bought the technology in from another company, never really believed in it, and didn't develop it enough so that it could maintain its technological lead.

    When Commodore went belly up, it was in a large part due to their failed attempt to get into the IBM clone business. They were a company that wanted to be like IBM, not like Apple. They even called their company Commodore Business Machines...

    --
    ${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
  58. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by Ryano · · Score: 1

    "So what killed NeXT? High prices, lack of standardization with the X community, and (ultimately) the Web."

    Ironic, given that Tim Berners-Lee developed the concept of the Web on a NeXT Cube.

    http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/WorldWideWeb. html

  59. Re:As if... by DanThe1Man · · Score: 1
    I wonder hows these problems will face with Steve Job's next NeXT venture, osX with the apple cube.

    - No slots, obviously.
    - Only 8 RAM slots in the station (=32 MB).

    LOL 8? You would never fit that in a tiny cube (even if ram is better now) Upgradeing should still may be a problem.

    - Non-upgradable Video card
    I heard that Voodoo is trying to make its cards small enough to fit in the cube, so they might have that one down.

    - Ethernet and SCSI really had sub-standard performance. SCSI couldn't use many of the available PC disks at the time.
    With differnt standards different probablems will occure.

    The Unix below was quite rooten, performance-wise, from a porting standpoint and from correctness and freedom of gcc warning issues in include files.
    well, I guess we will see how bad Apple had to screw with BSD to get it to run right.

    I don't really know my stuff on these, so don't flame me too bad. I do find it funny that it seams that Steve Jobs is living his NeXT dreams with Apple by doing nearly the exact same thing he did before. I would think that if he didn't make the same mistakes that he might have a chance to succeed.

  60. NeXTSTEP and administration by Mr_Z · · Score: 1

    NeXT was a great system and the machine were very cool but all I can remember is what a pain it was to administer a NeXT network!

    NeXT used a product called NetInfo for network administration (similar to NIS on SUN) which always seemed to suffering from some sort of problem.

    --
    Charlie Dont Surf!
  61. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Well in it's defense, the BeOS GUI takes time to get used to. Initially, I was appalled by the yellow title bars, but hey, it grows on you. Still pissed off by the poor right-click support though. As for themes, they kick ass. The main thing is that themes don't change the UI, they change the look. I personally don't like the default NeXT theme (or at least the default Window Maker theme) because it is too dark for my taste. Theming allows you to change the colors, the shapes, "the look" but retains the parts that make a GUI efficiant and functional (menus, placement, hotkeys, right clicking, object orientation, etc.)

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  62. Re:F i r s t P o s t by Grahf666 · · Score: 1

    I have an old NeXTWorld magazine comparing a standard NeXTStation, a SparcStation 2, and a Mac IIfx (Apple's workstation offering at the time). The sparc was the fastest, followed by the NeXT, and the Mac in a distant third. The Mac had a 68030 processor, whereas the NeXT and the Sun both had 040's. They tallied up prices, adding a bunch of periphirals to the Sun and Mac to show how well loaded the NeXTStation was out of the box (kinda like Macs today, you know). The Mac came out to something like $12,0000. The NeXT was around $10,000, I think, and the Sun was the cheapest, at a thousand or so less. The editors argued that the NeXT was still likely the best buy because of the extra features of the hardware and the OS.

    I think I agree with that, because frankly, Sun's OS pretty much sucked at the time. They had something like 2 different GUI's for SunOS, which were incompatible and had different apps for the to GUI's. The other option was of course pure command line, which no doubt paled in comparison to the highly evolved NextStep user interface, at least in the eyes of those not accustomed to a CLI world.

    NeXT's real failing, I think, was their failure to target their hardware at one specific market. In the early days, NeXT marketed their computers at university labs, mainly. In the middle of NeXT's short lifespan, they told the world how great scientific computing was using NeXT's. NeXTWorld ran articles describing how great FORTRAN worked in NeXTStep. Towards the end, in the era of the x86 port of NeXTStep, NeXT targeted their OS at custom applications developers, pointing out how, using Objective C and the NeXT developer tools, programmers could cut their development time from a year to few months. This last approach has been where OpenStep, and the early iterations of Mac OS X have stayed. It could have garnered them a lot more market share, and probably a longer lifespan, if they'd simply used that same marketing approach all along. At least that's what some people say.

  63. Why did it fail? Jobs and his ego. by Gandalf_007 · · Score: 1
    It failed (IMHO it never *failed*, just didn't live up to its potential) because of Jobs' ego. My father, who still has a NeXT cube sitting on his desk, had a chance to meet Steve Jobs, at a NeXTworld conference or something. He mentioned to Mr. Jobs that it would be a good idea to release a version of the operating system that ran on Sun hardware, which was *the* big thing at the time (circa 1989). Jobs said something to the effect that he wanted to make more money off of the hardware. But just look a couple of years later, and lo and behold, they released versions for Intel and Sparc. However, by that point, Solaris and X had been established as the OS of choice on the Sparc (whereas at the NeXT's launch Sun was floundering about with NeWS and other things), and it was too little, too late.

    The only reason Jobs' ego hasn't killed Apple yet is that they've done a better job of marketing to the general public. But don't put it past him to screw up Apple too. (Don't get me wrong, Jobs has done some good things--inventing the NeXT for one, Pixar for another.)

    --

    "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
  64. Cover of Newsweek Issue by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

    A side note: Did anyone else notice the cover of the Newsweek issue that starts that online article? It reads, "Why Bush Is Winning." Good ole Newsweek, always able to call them a mile away...

    --
    *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  65. The RIAA is no Technology Prophet by StoryMan · · Score: 1

    Actually, one of the most interesting sentences of the article is this: "[The NeXT box] can also record with the fidelity of a compact disc."

    It's interesting, of course, in light of Napster -- and in light of the RIAA's utter lack of foresight.

    It's hard to be a prophet -- but you can't help look back on articles like this and feel ominous rumblings of things to come.

    It also points to the RIAA's astonishing hubris. The sense of "Well, we're the goddamn RIAA. We don't have time to think about the future and protect our assets. NeXT? Fidelity of a compact disc? What the fuck are you talking about?"

  66. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by be-fan · · Score: 2

    Well, that really isn't multi-user. That's multiple profiles. Windows 98 has the same concept, that there are different logins, they each have access to certain apps, and they each have their own preferences, etc. That really doesn't take much OS support. However, multi-user is much more complex. It means that applications now can be in either system or local scope, it means that multiple people and use the system at the same time, it means the system must manage multiple people, it makes administration harder, it makes software installation harder, etc. Profiles probably are a very important. I wouldn't say it's a "must" but they are very important. However, multi-user adds a lot of complexity that really isn't needed if you just want to be able to have individual logins and preferences.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  67. Ramblings of a long-time NeXT owner by RebornData · · Score: 4

    I bought a NeXT as a freshman in college in 1991. Prior to that, I had been a Apple fan, having learned structured programming in Applesoft BASIC (!) and later, Pascal on a Mac. I had contemplated buying a Mac when I got to school, and had picked out the model. I don't remember the specific number, but it was a mid-range box with a separate monitor and a 68030. The rig + software was going to run me $3500.

    I had been interested in the NeXT since I'd first heard about it during the company launch circa 1988, which (as you can see from this article) did gather quite a bit of popular attention. I never imagined I'd actually get to use one of these things, and was totally pumped when I found out that our school not only had a few, but that they were available for sale in the campus store.

    1990 was the year the second-generation NeXT machines were announced- an upgraded "Cube" and the new, ultra-slim "Slab", which made even a sparcstation look clunky. What astounded me was that the base-model slab sold for $3000, with a 20MHz 68040, Motorola DSP, hi-res 17" 2-bit monochrome monitor, 8MB RAM, and a 104MB hard drive. With the addition of an external 135MB drive, I was at the same price as the Mac I'd wanted for the next generation in performance, across the board. I didn't need to buy any software- it came with a Word processor, some games, and pretty much everything else I needed. It stomped on all of the PCs and Macs at the time in terms of processor speed, and looked damn cool sitting on my desk. It wasn't a tough decision.

    A number of people in this thread have said that the NeXT didn't have much that was special about it's hardware. I'd have to disagree- the inside of that machine was nearly as beautiful as the outside, with a motherboard that looked absolutely vacant compared to most others of the time. It had a stupidly small number of cables: a power cable to the CPU, and a single cable from the CPU to the monitor which carried power and everything else (sound familiar?). The keyboard plugged into the monitor, and the mouse plugged into the keyboard. These 2nd generation machines corrected most of the problems of the first gen- the 68040 was fast / competitive with other processors, and they dropped the optical drive for SCSI hard disks for primary storage.

    Of course, the software kicked ass. I used the machine very productively throughout college- as a computer science major, the fact that there was UNIX under the hood was a major benefit, since I was able to get gnuemacs, gcc/g++, LaTeX, and all of the other tools necessary to duplicate the development environment used on the Sun-based campus network. The DSP didn't add a lot of real value, but it sure was fun to prank around with the demo programs that used it, as well as the wide variety of sound utilities available on the 'net. The machine came with Lotus Improv, which was a total-rethink of the spreadsheet that, while missing major areas of functionality (undo, scripting in formulas), was totally symbolic (no absolute cell references) and could handle 7-dimensional sheets with ease.

    Indirectly, this machine got me my first job, and set me on a career path that I'm still following today. Because it was UNIX, I was one of the few students on campus that had root access to anything (Linux hadn't really hit yet, and the university computers were locked down), and I got the chance to poke around the machine and learn the basics of system administration. Which got me an on-campus job doing UNIX system administration as a sophomore, and, well, I've been hooked since.

    Today, the machine sits on my shelf, looking cool, but not doing anything. It still runs (mostly), but the last time I upgraded the OS, the minimum RAM requirements exceeded 8MB, and I just haven't had the need to justify the effort to track down the ancient SIMMs that would be needed to get it usably fast again. I do miss it- I still get pissed off at the relative clunkiness of nearly every other OS. The NeXT was a work of art in many respects, and it was very sad to see the company eventually fade to black.

    Which is why, for the first time in years, I'm excited about the Mac again. I really hope they get OS/X right, as Apple has the market power to make this cool tech successful in the mainstream. It would be really great to see a measure of grace and elegance restored to the OS world that I think was lost when NeXTStep went away.

  68. Re:NeXT and computer music by Art+Tatum · · Score: 2

    You may be interested in the fact that there is an effort underway to port the MusicKit to GNUstep/Linux. My ultimate goal is to get DSP hardware acceleration and a superb realtime synthesis solution to run under GNUstep/Linux. Perhaps I can get SynthBuilder to work.

  69. Re:jobs and gates by radar+bunny · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the info about Gates recruting from NeXTSTEP---- never heard that before.

    As far as
    Yes, many of the innovations in NeXTSTEP have (finally) been cloned by Redmond, but that is their standard modus operandus. They never innovate.
    That was basically my point though I was trying to not pull the usual slashdot geek attitdue of "microsoft sucks". I just wish the lawyers and businesmen who run the company would understand that real innovation is an investment... not just a purchase. That's one thing I've always respected about Apple and about Steve Jobs-- They've always been out there and really inovating. They've made mistakes, but they've always learned from them. The point is... apple has taken chances and produced quality hardware and software. Microsoft has only purchased/borrowed.. and repackaged.

    Gates was widely quoted as saying, "Develop for NeXTSTEP? I'd rather piss on it!"
    Yeah, he says that then recruits from them. Why does this not surprise me. Didn't he also bash the internet and the world wide web even as late as say 93/94 -- calling it a fad ans saying it wasn't going to last. Then, in 95 turn around and start leveraging I.E. with Windows??

    I know this comes off as old fashion MS bashing, but it's not. MS has a lot of great talent --- I just wish the businessmen who run the company would let them really innovate and develop. They jsut might surprise themselves.

    --
    "I mean, All you can definately say about a fellow who thinks he's a poached egg, is; He's in the minority." James Burke
  70. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    Objective C has a lot for it, and a lot against.

    So far as a generally accessible langauge is concerned, in ObjC it is far too easy to write a program that can cause an unexpected core dump. Sure it makes many memory management problems easier in some respects -- but rarely does it make them no-brainers. And I'm afraid that that is what is required in this day and age -- unfortunately too many people do not have the time to bother with memory management, they just want to 'write their program and go...'.

    TOM is an interesting, marginal, 'currently small-time' language that builds useful ideas upon the syntax of ObjC; but in truth, there is much yet to be discovered about how to write really good programming languages. So long as we don't forget ObjC, little will be lost if it ends up getting replaced. And even that seems unlikely given the stance of the GNUstep project.

    John

    --
    John_Chalisque
  71. My ramblings on NeXT and NeXTStep by spitzak · · Score: 4
    I programmed the NeXT for about 2 years, starting on the emulated version that ran on a Sun workstation, and then on an actual cube.

    Though NeXTStep certainly is interesting, I do not join in the uniform praise for it that everybody else seems to have. I am also worried that the problems with NeXTStep are being duplicated in BeOS, OS X, and (somwhat) in Gnome and KDE.

    Good points:

    The postscript interface to the display. It included Adobe's "DPS", but it should not be confused with DPS on X. The important difference is that all commands (such as to create a window) were in PostScript. It is difficult to describe how incredible an advantage it is to only have to think about a single "context" to get all your work done. X is a total hassle where you have to manage windows, gc's, OpenGL glxContexts, DPS contexts, and perhaps the new "Xpicture" objects. NeWS also had this, and in fact integrated it better: the window-creation commands described the window shape using PostScript paths and transformations.

    The PostScript printer really worked, far better than the mess that is on Linux now. You could, with incredible reliability, do popen("lpr") and send any postscript you wanted, and it would queue and print!

    Problems:

    The lack of a hard disk on the base model was a real problem. Basically the optical disk had to be used as a hard disk. Jobs thought people would own their copy of the system and stick them in disk-less machines on a campus to enable them, this is in fact insane if you think about the need to store location-specific configuration imformation like the name of the printer server! (The machine I used had a hard disk, in that case the optical was an excellent back-up device)

    NeXTStep wad very slow to start any applications. It had to completely build every single control panel that would ever be used when it started up. At the time I thought this intolerable, but I guess it has become standard on Windows and Mac.

    This meant terminal.app was slow to start. Very frustrating for Unix users who wanted to create and destroy these rapidly. For this reason the first software we worked on was a replacement for the terminal (the marketing name was Communicae), and our intention was to bypass as much of NeXTStep as possible. I also wanted to get rid of the menu (which is pretty useless for a terminal) and it appeared to be impossible to make a menu-less NeXTStep program.

    This ran into the most serious problem. Though enough information was provided so that we could create plain windows with PostScript, getting them to cooperate with the NeXTStep programs required tracing down (often with disassembly) a lot of undocumented stuff. The NeXT programs refused to click on top of my windows, and many many other problems.

    This was an absolute pain in the ass, and NeXT's attitude that we were nuts for avoiding their wonderful code did not help. There are very good reasons for using low-level programming, for instance to get maximum speed, to try new GUI ideas, and (most important nowadays) to write cross-platform code.

    I want to plead to the OS-X (and BeOS) designers to not repeat this mistake: please document how to bypass the toolkit!. If you don't, people are going to write incredible kludges to achieve it, and you will have a worse problem remaining compatable in the future. And if you suceed in making it impossible to bypass the toolkit, you will completely cut off any company that is interested in porting software from Windows or Unix but not willing to commit a lot of resources yet...

    I also think NeXTStep had some design problems, and am scared at how many of them are being copied today:

    Steve Job's hatred for the second mouse button resulted in insane design decisions. The NeXT had two buttons, and there was an option to treat them the same or different. Unbelivably, this modified the server (rather than just set something that NeXTStep read). A program using NeXTStep (or even bypassing it) could not tell the two buttons apart, unless the configuration setting was changed!

    "Layers" This is being copied by Gnome, and sort of copied by the "Dock" being used by Windows and OSX and Gnome. "Layers" are why the menus and toolbars are atop the programs and have to "hide" when the program is "inactive" (not to be confused with child/transient-for windows, which are atop a *specific* window). "Layers" are also why the dock is atop all the windows, making a large amount of screen space useless (all modern systems "solve" this problem by providing the auto-hide option).

    Let me plead again with the designers: let me click any window atop any other unrelated window! It is not that hard, in fact it simplifies the interface considerably!

    And don't give me the excuse "but that will make the dock (or menu) hard to get to". That problem applies to every window on your screen, and you should be working on improving window navigation, not arrogantly claiming that some windows are "important".

    Jobs and many other UI designers seem convinced that showing a '/' character in a filename is user-unfriendly, and go through all kinds of weird hoops to avoid it. The Mac and Windows use newlines (and you have to hold a damn mouse button down to see it), while NeXTStep (and OSX) have this column arrangement where you have to scroll horizontally to see where you are! Comon, guys, it really is not that bad to display a slash! In fact the average user sees them all the time on the net! And if you did, it would be much easier and clearer how to cut & paste or drag & drop a filename!

    I did not like Objective-C syntax for methods, it was totally different than the syntax for a function call. This made it impossible to switch an interface between C functions and methods, even with macros. People say it was like that to "look like SmallTalk" but that is bogus, as SmallTalk has *only* that syntax. The dual syntax was so the parser could be cheap, no other reason!

    Also the first versions were too dynamic: if you mistyped the name of a method you would not find out until you ran the program and it tried to call it! Extremely bad for code such as error handlers that may never be called. They tried to fix this and had lots of trouble with already-existing code that relied on it (because you could create methods at run-time!).

  72. I love this quote by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Billy boy is discribed as
    'virtuoso software engineer with virtually zero charisma'. I bet he loved that description, although I've got to question the 'virtuoso' part. Freedom to 'Innovate' anyone.

  73. Who said it failed? by AJWM · · Score: 4

    NeXT certainly didn't fail. Oh, the NeXT Cube and the other hardware offerings were never hugely successful -- the lesson there isn't new, any largely closed, difficult to upgrade and expensive hardware has faltered and ultimately failed without a redesign. That's the other lesson Jobs should have learned at Apple (other than the one about retaining 51% ownership).

    But the NeXT company and software, now, that succeeded very well. Microsoft ripped off some of the NeXT GUI's elements for Win95. The GUI itself has been cloned for other Unices. Their NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP and WebObjects software has been very successful.

    And finally, Jobs and NeXT very successfully convinced Apple to give them money to take over the company. (Sure, on paper Apple acquired NeXT -- but look whose management is now in charge at Apple.)

    Hardware comes and goes, but the NeXT design concepts live on.

    --
    -- Alastair
    1. Re:Who said it failed? by sql*kitten · · Score: 1
      Microsoft ripped off some of the NeXT GUI's elements for Win95. The GUI itself has been cloned for other Unices

      Oh, I get it now, Microsoft "rips off" and Unix "clones". Welcome to Slashdot.

  74. Re:NeXT's programming env was great! by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

    I hate to keep spouting off here on /. but I feel it necessary to reply to all those with OPENSTEP experience to remind them of the existence of GNUstep. GNUstep has IB and PB clones in development, and since you mention WebObjects, there is a GNUstep Web project as well. We have a GNU 3DKit too. If you can port or write end-user applications (or help out with the core frameworks) we would appreciate this help.

  75. Speaking of Objective C... by hiryuu · · Score: 1

    All the cool software tools that were on NeXT will be available on OS X when it comes out, for those of you who don't know. Objective C, Project Builder and the other RAD tools, etc. This was part of the deal when Apple bought it.

    With that said, then, fond memories of using a NeXT back at school led me to go to great lengths to acquire one after graduation, just for grins. Since getting it, I debated about digging up a text or two and learning ObjC. I had thought that any efforts I put into such a learning attempt would be just character-building and/or fun (in the sick-n-twisted way), but is it possible that I could actually put this to some use in the foreseeable future?

    --
    Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
    1. Re:Speaking of Objective C... by rm+-rf+/etc/* · · Score: 1


      Sure, you can use ObjectiveC for MacOSX development and about any Unix development. I use it whenever my program lends itself to OO since I hate C++. Since GCC supports obj-c and it's just a superset of C, it makes for nice GUI programming for any toolkit with a C library. And who knows, GNUstep might take off one of these days, but now that Cocoa is a moving target, I doubt it will ever really get there...

  76. Gates Jealous? by marksthrak · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else notice how jealous Bill Gates seems to be of the NeXT box? "Anybody can write a check to Sony," he says. I think Bill wishes he'd thought of it.

  77. Re:Almost... [Re:Sorry Emmett] by GRAMMERSoft · · Score: 1

    Jobs wears Nehru jackets?!??! That means he's an evil genius bent on world domination!!

    --
    That said, I think it's time I changed my .sig (again)
  78. As if... by cracauer · · Score: 3

    Owning a NeXTStation in 1991, I cannot share this enthusiasm.

    The Unix below was quite rooten, performance-wise, from a porting standpoint and from correctness and freedom of gcc warning issues in include files.

    The great GUI and its builder were shipped without documentation until Simson Garfinckle finally wrote his book. You were supposed to use their 5-day training and fill the holes with an expensive support contract.

    Hardware interface was also notoriously bad:
    - Ethernet and SCSI really had sub-standard
    performance. SCSI couldn't use many of the
    available PC disks at the time.
    - No slots, obviously.
    - Only 8 RAM slots in the station (=32 MB).
    - Non-upgradable Video card, and that with
    display postscript and its tendency to do
    single-pixel updates.

    I originally bought it mostly because it came with some nice commercial software packages bundled, because it was faster than a SPARC at the same price and I liked (and still do) Objective-C. PC Unixes were crap at the time. But soon the rotten Unix was what killed it for me, I bought a SPARC 18 months later (both systems from my personal money), sold the NeXT and was happy (until Solaris-2.1 made me switch to free PC Unixes). In retrospective, it had been better to buy the slower SPARC in first place and most of the commercial software sucked anyway and you weren't supposed to update the stuff that came bundled (as if much NeXT software ever got into several releases...).

    Martin

    1. Re:As if... by snookerdoodle · · Score: 1

      I had quite the opposite experience. Before I bought it, I was already a Unix/C developer. I hated C++. The NeXT was (and still would be if my slab had not died) the easiest computer I've ever used or programmed. I liked Mach. I had just as many porting problems with Solaris 1 and HPUX. I currently do not own or desire a computer at my home, but if OS/X is really as good as it appears, Steve may make a sucker out of me again...

    2. Re:As if... by sjvn · · Score: 1

      NeXT SCSI was bad, but you have to remember that all SCSI drives and interfaces had compatibility problems back then. You couldn't get any PC SCSI to work with a Mac or vice-versa, and, for that matter, getting anything to work with anything from antother company on a PC was an exercise in frustration.

      Steven

  79. What I remember about them by mbourgon · · Score: 2

    I have a real fond rememberance of them. They were one of the first 'real' unix boxen I used at Texas A&M. I still remember the specs: 15 MIPS, 2 MegaFlops (wow, eh?:) The A&M NeXT user group was called TexNext. We started out with a couple, eventually wound up with 6 cubes in Herb (H.R.Bright Building, our comp sci area). A couple years later, they spread, due to the 'pizza boxes'. We had a restricted access lab with about 25-30 of them, and another 5 scattered around campus. I remember the 2.88 drives the pizza boxes utilized. Someone else mentioned that they read Windows and Mac. Yup. Very nice, very handy.

    The GUI was beautiful. Their version of the Explorer/Finder was excellent. The dock was great. it's amazing how much they packed into a 17" monitor. The programming tools were slick. At one of our demos, they built a fairly simple app in under 5 minutes, needing only one line of code. The rest (all the GUI) they dragged and dropped. Very nice, and I didn't play with it as much as I wanted.

    One of things I really liked was Zilla. Hook up 5 machines to a network, run Zilla, and use them for parallel processing! One of the guys in the original lab (5th floor) was using them on his thesis. He could either use the NeXTs and a real language, or COBOL and the Cray Y-MP we had (this was in 1990-1991, so that thing rocked!)

    Oh, and the grayscale. I have no idea why, but you didn't miss color at all. Everything made full use of the different shades of gray. Impressive.

    All in all, I remember that they were only remotely affordable if you bought them through universities. Ours had a drive and an optical, and several of us were going to split the cost of a disk for it. Considering the hardware it seemed fast. It was Unix, it was elegant, stylish, and very cool. I need to go see if I find a gui to replace what I currently use. And dammit, I hope most of what made it cool makes it to OS X. I can't wait to see it running on ultra-fast hardware!

    --
    "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  80. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by freebe · · Score: 2
    Be is more similar to NeXT than you think...

    Simple, clean and powerfull. Unfortunately very few apps. were available. Just finding a GOOD accounting package was a hassel (Never did find a reliable one). The standard apps (Spreadsheet, Word proc., Graphics) were easy enough to find but god forbid if you needed some thing special (Accounting, Payroll, Productivity).

    Ditto for BeOS. Accounting apps are among the most frequent gripes of BeOS users for some reason. (Funny, a $40 HP calculator and a sheet of paper works fine for me :)

    I miss their mail app the most. With the colorizer plugin you could sort out spam in seconds.

    In BeOS all email is stored by attributes... which means you can write shell scripts that work on email fields, sort mail, etc. Very cool.

    Come to think of it, their drag and drop was amazing. Grab an image file and drop it into Tiffany (graphics app), and viola!! it opens. Cut any data format and past it into almost any app and it would handle it.

    Translators. Just drag a new translator in to the appropriate folder, and *wham* even the simple image viewer can open photoshop files, etc.

    Try grabbing a section of excel and pasting it in notepad... The results are just not the same....

    Just grabbed a section of spreadsheet and pasted it into a word processor doc in Gobe Productive. Worked fine for me.

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  81. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by chriseh · · Score: 3

    A couple of corrections regarding your post: First generation NeXT machines were 68030 (I believe), the NeXT Cube, Turbo and NeXTstation (+-color) were 68040s at 25 or 33 Mhz. Like even the Macs at the time, NeXTs had an internal and external SCSI bus, so adding a faster/bigger external HD was easy. I don't know of anyone serious who had a NeXT station without a HD. Also, the statement 'The DSP never got used for anything intresting' is completey false. IRCAM (a federally funded research orginization in France) used the NeXT to create the ISPW (Ircam Signal Processing Workstation) and there are probably still some NeXT cubes being used today for live/interactive DSP (although most of the components of the ISPW have been ported over to the Mac in MAX/MSP - www.cycling74.com or in IRCAM's jMax). This probably made the NeXT machine one of the coolest DSP machines ever. I do agree that the NeXT is a very cool looking machine, and I don't plan on getting rid of mine at all. It is/was incredibly stable and its attractive design makes a great terminal/discussion piece for the living room.

  82. As in the well known saying by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    He who wields the knife -- never wears the crown.
    John

    --
    John_Chalisque
  83. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    Hopefully, a lot of modern improvements in thinking in programming language design will be brought to bear in what picks up where Objective C left of. It, as a language, has many lessons to learn -- and the growing lack of its use gives it precisely the opportunity it needs to evolve and learn those lessons.
    John

    --
    John_Chalisque
  84. Re:dude! by cybercuzco · · Score: 1
    Spare me the histrionics, Crime against humanity? My sig is raping and pillaging as we speak, its killed thousands of ethnic minorities, my sig imprisons and tortures, all will bow down before my sig, etc etc.

    --

  85. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

    Have fun.

    The NeXT cubes have four slots (with some variant of NuBus), with dimensions of IIRC 11" x 11". The motherboard occupied one slot. About the only other cards ever made were the NeXT Dimension (a pretty rare video card) and one or two other really specialized boards. Some cubes have been hacked to contain multiple motherboards.

    I don't think you'll get an ATX board in there without really pulling things apart.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  86. Re:Why is this sad? by GoRK · · Score: 1

    I have already ordered two of the new Dual G4's.

    But I still wanted to see OS/X make it to X86.

    It is useless to fight the PC/Mac war with me, wee man. I frolick between multiple platforms like a fucking whore on Saturday Night!

  87. I have three! by Wisp · · Score: 1

    One color slab, one b+w slab, and one turbo cube..

    Amazing how little has changed over the years
    except for speed. (Well I run WindowMaker on
    my Linux Boxen so who am I to talk.)

  88. Re:The NeXT Optical Drive by smart2000 · · Score: 1
    Not true. The base model could be ordered with just an optical. The idea was that you could net boot it and use the optical for personal storage. But from day one, they did offer 330MB or 660MB hard drives, and recommended the 660 MB hard drives for the netbooting server.

    You could if you wanted boot it off the optical. This was how you installed/reinstalled the OS.

    Cannon made the opticals in a single and double sided model, but the next drive only supported reading/writing on one side, so all NeXT opticals were 256MB, You could but cannon opticals and flip them over and have another 256MB of space. Under the pre-1.0 version of the OS inserting a 256MB optical upside down would panic the machine

    --
    To purchase it is not like spending money but rather it is an investment in the future in a blow against the empire
  89. shipping late by Silver+A · · Score: 2

    I remember seeing a t-shirt at Berkeley with the black cube NeXT logo, except that it read "NeVr". The t-shirt came from Apple and was being worn by a student who had interned there. If your product is late enough (and hyped enough) for vaporware parody t-shirts to appear, you've got a problem.

  90. Bzzzt.....wrong by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    In that case why didn't the Amiga kick the PCs ass, considering it was more powerful and cost about 1/10th of the price of the PC. Marketing is the reason, which encompasses more than just price.

    1. Re:Bzzzt.....wrong by NetFu · · Score: 1

      As a current/former Amiga user, I think that's a very good point. The first thing out of everyone's mouth on "why NeXT failed" seems to be a continual stream of "it cost too much". Sure, that's true ... if you're open-minded to all options. The failure of the Amiga has to show that NeXT's and the Amiga's failures were primarily marketing. If people didn't know about the Amiga or just couldn't get one easily, then they'd buy a Wintel PC. (Yes, yes, NeXT didn't compete in the consumer market, but you can't completely write off marketing for their target market of higher education -- look at the Mac vs. Wintel situation today in the same market)

  91. NeXT incremental, not revolutionary by peter303 · · Score: 2

    The problem with NeXT was that by the time it came to market in 1988 (two years late), the rest of the workstation market had caught up. NeXT was only incemental compared to these products:
    1) The Mac made the first significant commercial jump to bitmap graphics. NeXT just had a larger screen.
    2) Sun, MicroVax, HP, and Apollo had defined the UNIX workstation market by then. In 1984 when NeXT began, this market was still unformed.

    Other problems included price/perfomance:
    3) $6,000 commercial, about $4,000 for students. Very high then and now.
    4) The CDROM was extermely slow. You had to wait forever on disk ops. And of course, Steve J. banned the waiting-clock icon as "bad design". So you could click several times and really screw yourself.

  92. Re:Another interesting character... by angelo · · Score: 1
    Isn't that interesting? Nowadays, I don't think anyone would bring on Perot to add "respectability"... :)

    All joking aside, ever hear of Perot Systems? In my field (Medical IT) they were/are(?) a big player in hospital computer systems. They are one of our bigger customers here, and they held a lot of power and money in their heyday. Of course, Ross's son runs the company so daddy can be a full time loon.

  93. Re:jobs and gates by sql*kitten · · Score: 1

    Remember that Jobs at the time was trying to sell a $10,000 machine to the educational market. Bill Gates showed admirable foresight in not getting involved with NeXT, which blundered from market to market, eventually dwindling to a negligible share.

  94. NeXT BEFORE XWindows by peter303 · · Score: 2

    The first commercial XWindows came out in 1987 from DEC on the MicroVAX. Sun and SGI did not adopt until early 1990s, though there were academic ports. NeXT started UI in 1985.

  95. Waxing something NeXT by RevAaron · · Score: 5

    Ah! It's about time the Slashdot community recongnized NeXT. So many Linux and *BSD users are oblivious to NeXTSTEP (and later OpenStep, Rhapsody and Mac OS X). The GUI, Objective-C, the programming framework, and Unix and Mach. They're a dream to use!

    The GUI: Pure gold, man. In many ways, the NeXT GUI is far more elegant and functional than even the Mac OS GUI- CDE and other WMs and environments for X11 come nowhere even close.

    Objective-C: A much better object oriented C than C++. More like a cross between C and Smalltalk than some tacky add on to C. Elegant, simple, and a minimal syntax change to regular C. Dynamic like Smalltalk, but retaining the run-time speed of C. Objective-C's dynamic nature allowed for great products like ActiveDeveloper and Joy Developer which allows Obj-C users to develop apps interactively like Smalltalk or Python, whereas C++ is about as static as it gets.

    Programming Framework: Killer API. A rich class library of support classes like the mutable array (what?! you're still rolling your own?) and dictionary (or hash-table) as well as the AppKit, the means of creating GUI apps. Also, distributed objects were a no brainer with the Foundation framework which was a part of NeXTSTEP. It's a good thing to see this framework brought to the masses in the form of GNUstep.

    Not to mention the IDE... InterfaceBuilder and ProjectBuilder are two tools which the world just recently cought up with. All of these ideas you see in most modern IDEs were invented for NeXTSTEP.

    Unix and Mach: What can I say? Geeks dig it. Mach allows for some funky IPC action, and if you wanted, you could always drop into tcsh if that's where you feel more at home. The truly great part? You didn't have to know how to use a shell to get work done. If you didn't know Unix, you could still have all of the power of Unix exploited by this wonderful OS.

    I still use my cube when I can, for lighter-weight computing, something I choose over my Power Mac G4 or a PC running Linux whenever I can.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    1. Re:Waxing something NeXT by To+Mega · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you're wrong.

      You /could/ get Foundation for NEXTSTEP 3.2. I think it started shipping preinstalled with 3.3.

      I know for sure because that's the only way OmniWeb 2.x would run on those OSes, and i'm absolutely sure I ran OmniWeb 2.x on 3.2.

    2. Re:Waxing something NeXT by DrLoveMD · · Score: 1

      well, since i'm not a programmer, i can't argue with the programming aspect of NeXT. but from what i have worked with (i am a web designer at WMU, and they still have a few NeXT boxes lying around) they're not that great. some ideas where innovative. some boggled the mind. but over all, i think they were good for the time, but as with most machines, it got outdated VERY quickly because of lack of ability to adapt. it's either Jobs' way or the highway. i'm just glad Jobs never ran for office. anyway, i think another downfall of NeXT was Jobs telling people they needed to upgrade to a very expensive machine, and after they bought it, he told them they didn't really need that one and that she should get the NEWER one because the one they just bought sucked. in business, that is pretty much handing the executioner his axe and putting your head in the basket. i personally don't like the CLI for NeXT either. but that is just my opinion.

      --
      "How it infuriates a bigot, when he is forced to drag out his dark convictions"-- Logan Pearsall Smith
    3. Re:Waxing something NeXT by djallstar · · Score: 1

      i'm feeling you, man. it amazes me that i have *still* yet to see a GUI as functional and lovely as NeXTStep's. this was actually the first computer i ever spent a significant amount of time on, outside of my TI994A--and it hurt to have to use a DOS machine back home. i feel like crying...i miss the spinning floptical icon, the 3D file folders that changed when you drop a file on them. it took microsoft YEARS (MSIE destop extensions) to finally bite off of them properly, and still doesn't have it altogether. it's freaky; i often have dreams that i'm in a comupter lab full of color NeXT boxes--we had the greyscales, and 2 color ones, with *scanners*!. i can't believe i'm that old that i'd read that "most of us haven't played with one..."

    4. Re:Waxing something NeXT by benedict · · Score: 1

      I'm puzzled by your last comment. You don't like standard unix shells? Or you don't like the ni* programs? Or what?

      --

      --
      Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
  96. Re:William by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I loved it when they called Gates "A virtuoso aoftware engineer with virtually zero charisma"

  97. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    Yes, the hype of Java has won out in WebObjects. As of WebObjects 5 (not released yet), WO will be "100% Pure Java." In the past, Java relied on a Java Objective-C bridge to use WebObjects, which was written all in Objective-C. Apple decided to rewrite WebObjects in Java so they could have the marketing markee "100% Java." It's a shame, but at least they're keeping Objective-C around for Mac OS X programming.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  98. F i r s t   P o s t by java_sucks · · Score: 1

    Amen to that my brother. They had the same problem with the Mac's... they just flat out refused to compete on price... and thus they allowed MS to filet their arses. Mr. Jobs had a very hard time grasping that beyond the zealots, many people consider $$$ as a very important part of the purchasing equation, unless of course your a company like id who can afford to drop a bundle on a NeXt workstation or a nifty SGI box.

    1. Re:F i r s t   P o s t by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

      They weren't competing with MS at that point. They were competing with Sun.

      The machines were expensive and underpowered, compared to Sun's boxes of the period.

      Only later did they screw up while competing with MS.

      --
      Max V.

      --
      There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
      Max V.
      NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
    2. Re:F i r s t   P o s t by java_sucks · · Score: 1

      Well...not that it matters... but what I meant was that the Macs refusal to compete on price was one of the things that lead the their utter and total loss to MS. I didn't mean to imply that NeXt was competing with MS, but rather that a Steve Jobs run NeXt also refused to compete on price. Thus showing that as a theme of Steve Jobs companies..or whatever..

  99. NeXT and computer music by MrAtoz · · Score: 1

    One area that the NeXT really revolutionized was computer music. There was a whole history of Unix-based sound synthesis applications prior to NeXT, but support for recording/playback was dreadful and expensive. With NeXT, you got the DSP port that could connect you with a third-party A-D converter box (there were a couple of different ones to choose from). And most importantly, the OS came with tremendous audio software support, right out of the box. Things that caused you to tear your hair out under older systems were now implemented as a single line API call.

    And, most importantly, all this on a machine that you could conceivably purchase and administer for yourself at home (especially with the academic discount). NeXT was the beginning of the end for the big university computer music studio, and the start of the high-end home digital audio workstation.

  100. Here is why it failed: Steve Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Here is why it failed: Steve Jobs by CrazyJoel · · Score: 1

      So, basically, you're saying that it failed because it didn't run Windows.

      --

      Such is the infinite Grace of Popeye.
  101. NeXTStep: multiplatform by bee · · Score: 1

    One detail that is generally overlooked is how NeXTStep ran on multiple hardware platforms-- NeXT hardware, Intel, Sun, and HP. And the coolest feature of all was that under NeXTStep 3, binaries could be compiled 'fat' and they would run on any of those platforms. That's right, the same binary running on vastly different hardware. Personally, I think it deserves a nomination to the 'Greatest Hacks Of All Time' list-- well, an honorable mention at least.

    ---

    --
    At least mafia-owned pizzarias make excellent pizza. Compare to Bill Gates.
  102. jobs and gates by radar+bunny · · Score: 2

    Take from this page

    Jobs invited Gates to contribute software to the NeXT machine, but Gates declined, saying there wasn't enough money in the narrow market Jobs was pursuing.

    Note: He didn't decline because he was too busy innovating.

    I'm not simply trying to bash gates, but think of how much he and microsoft could have learned by simply being involved in a project like this. Yea, NeXT would have probably still failed, and yes Gates would have lost some money, but it could have been a real investment in knowledge.

    --
    "I mean, All you can definately say about a fellow who thinks he's a poached egg, is; He's in the minority." James Burke
    1. Re:jobs and gates by Matthew+Weigel · · Score: 1
      Yea, NeXT would have probably still failed,...

      Failed? How do you figure? As has been pointed out, NeXT was bought by Apple, and depending on whether you count Jobs as an Apple or NeXT guy, NeXT is either strongly represented in management, or is management at Apple. NeXT's technologies (updated, of course) are being brought forth as mainstream by a major niche player, rather than a startup. Most of the people who worked at NeXT have either moved to Apple, or been able to use their time at NeXT to land even sweeter jobs.

      So, where's the failure? :-)

      --
      --Matthew
    2. Re:jobs and gates by sstaton · · Score: 1

      Gates hired many of the best NeXTSTEP people as fast as he could drag them away from the (unfortunately) failing software startups. One fellow in particular (as I recall) went to work on a "radically new OS from MS" that he couldn't talk about. I assume he meant NT, but the features he alluded to never made it out of the lab. Yes, many of the innovations in NeXTSTEP have (finally) been cloned by Redmond, but that is their standard modus operandus. They never innovate ... just co-opt. Gates was widely quoted as saying, "Develop for NeXTSTEP? I'd rather piss on it!" Well, COM and .NET are badly issued copies of ideas first demonstrated on NS.

      --

      The two most common things in the Universe are dark matter and stupidity.

  103. The more things change... by ShieldWolf · · Score: 5

    Reading this article was like a freaky time warp!

    * The story itself deals with Jobs unveiling a revolionary CUBE computer, with innovative styling.

    * The other main story on the cover says "How Bush is winning."

    * The article itself is amlost identical to an article a couple of years ago whre Time chronicled Jobs' Apple turnaround, culimating with his famous Keynote. Many of the opinions of what Jobs was doing now vs. '88 are the same "Jobs is back", "He's learned from his mistakes", "He's matured".

    * Bill Gates disparaging a *nix distro as non-revolutionary.

    * Bill Gates saying he wouldn't write software for NeXT because the market was too small.

    Reading this article was weird, but the one thing that struck me was how nasty Bill was.

    -ShieldWolf

    --
    just = (My)Opinion.toCents();
    1. Re:The more things change... by angelo · · Score: 1

      The even sweeter part is Bill Gates will have written a product for a UN*X when OS X comes out.

      It will have a version of LookOut!, Oriface, and Exploder, in the least.

      Care for some crow, Bill?

    2. Re:The more things change... by chegosaurus · · Score: 1

      I liked the line about "little companies like Sun Microsystems" too. Whatever happened to them?

  104. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    The first cube had an 030, but the NeXTCube and Stations had 25MHz 040s. They followed up with the Turbos (33MHz 040s).

    With sufficient RAM, the 040 machines could be quite zippy. I beefed it up with RAM, and my Turbo Cube is quite respectable. I use it more than my 400MHz Linux box.

    The optical disk got tossed fairly early, and the DSP was put to all sorts of creative uses.

    The color hardware was quite impressive, as well. I have two NeXTDimension cards in my cube, so I have two 24 bit screens in addition to the Mono screen.

    The machine is really, really cool.

    --
    Max V.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  105. Welcome to NeXTstep 6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > Then again, how much of this is parallel to the MacOS X stuff?

    NeXTstep 0.9/1.0
    Original version

    NeXTstep 2
    Usable version (Workspace Manager, etc, etc)

    NeXTstep 3
    i386 port / sparc port / hppa port

    OPENSTEP (NeXTstep 4)
    Specification. OS independance. Windows Version (OPENSTEP enterprise)

    Mac OS X Server (NeXTstep 5)
    ppc version. Mac look. No more 3.x compatibility (ie: bye, bye NeXTmail and Workspace manager)

    Mac OS X (NeXTstep 6)
    ppc version only. Bundled with hardware. Integrated with the OS again.

    Last one sounds like the original NeXT. Let's hope that NeXTstep 7 oops, Mac OS XI will be i386/sparc/alpha/itanium...

    Cheers,

    --fred

  106. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    The prices range hugely. One Turbo Dimension cube went for $1500 on eBay.

    I got my first cube for $100, but stations are basically free around here.

    It just depends on where you are.

    --
    Max V.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  107. Re:After the article... by Slad · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't go as far as to say that NeXT actually failed. True, it never caught on like Jobs had hoped. However, we will never really know if it could have caught on, because NeXT was absorbed by Apple. You could say that Apple is turning into Apple-NeXT. The "G4 Cube" is very reminiscent of the NeXT machine. Also, Mac OS X is very close to NeXTSTEP. I guess you could say that "round 2" of the NeXT vision is beginning with the new G4 Cube (NeXT cube) and Mac OS X (NeXTSTEP).

    --
    I am Slad.
  108. Nextstep Lives by digibruce · · Score: 1

    I'm running Openstep right now on my PII-400 Windows 98 box, in the form of WebObjects Version 4.0 Developer (Picasso2Z). This gives me all the standard Unix command line programs and the ability to run PopOver, an excellent Openstep mail client. It's a bit unstable under 98 (much better under NT), but that's a small price to pay for real MIME compliance and not having email viruses and web bugs. Early versions of MacOSX Server could still be transformed into Nextstep (from a look-and-fell perspective) using the "defaults" shell command. By the time MacOSX is released, of course, everything will be well under the hood. NeXT never died - I've been consulting professionally using NeXT technology since 1992. At each major transition (the end of hardware, the end of Nextstep, the "purchase" by Apple), developers jumped ship and declared the technology dead. But it lives on, and will live on in millions of MacOSX machines.

  109. Animation industry by Media_Scumbag · · Score: 1

    You can thank NeXT running on PCs - DEC Alpha and Intel for a good many animated TV shows, and a number of features in the balance of the past decade.

    Cambidge Animation's Animo (http://www.cam-ani.co.uk/) ran on this setup, and was (and still is, on IRIX and NT) a major player in the 2D animation suite market. It's used all over the world... China, Korea, India, Europe, Burbank...

    I was battlefield promoted to administrate such a pipeline (OpenStep too), and think fondly of this OS when I see file operations on current NT servers crawl. What a way to get into *NIX - by diving into a bastard child of UNIX, Apple, and Intel.

  110. The Jobs resemblence by Bilestoad · · Score: 1

    ...is uncanny. Actually, emmett IS Steve Jobs. A freak wormhole has passed a copy back through time. (no need to explain further; /. readers understand these things) We are therefore destined to have at least two more cube computer products that people buy for reasons of appearance rather than functionality.

    Makers of black turtle-neck garments are said to have rejoiced at this news.

  111. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by M-G · · Score: 1

    ...in 1996 and thought..."Man, why does this look a lot like a perverted cross between MacOS and Win95?"

    Having used NeXTs at school around 1992, and then not seeing them again until I bought a few at an auction a year or so ago, I quickly realized how much of the Win95 UI was ripped off from NeXT.

    By the way, any NeXT users should take a look at this letter from Apple regarding support:

    http://www.apple.com/enterprise/letter. html

    Also, if you don't yet have NEXTSTEP 3.3, Apple was upgrading NeXT owners for free as part of their Y2K effort. I don't know if they're still making this available, but the details are still at:

    http://www.apple.com/enterprise/y2k/

  112. NeXT succeeded by conquering Apple! by peter303 · · Score: 2

    NeXT did not fail. It just took a while to succeed. Steve Jobs and Alex Tevian (sp?) took over Apple during the merger. The Mac Cube with Mac X OS are the successors to the NeXT Cube and NeXTStep, with some Apple compatibility.

    When you got Steve's millions, plus millions from Cannon and Ross Perot, you can take a while.

  113. Bill Gates is pretty cool... (argh! my karma!) by james+b · · Score: 2

    I know that he and his company are odious in almost all respects, but seeing his picture in this article made me realise something:
    Gates embodies quite a lot of 'geek qualities' - just look at the photo, coffee cup hanging from fingers, dorky glasses, looking decidedly... scruffy (even in a tie).
    It might all be part of a carefully sculpted public image, but I get the impression that he doesn't care what impression he gives.

    So, I think he's cool (while also being thoroughly dastardly, don't get me wrong...).

  114. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

    Were you talking personal accounting (Quicken) or Accounting with a capital A? Most people in BeOS complain about lack of Quicken, which is just silly.

    BOTH. I don't find it silly it helps small business and people balance their budget.

    But my point is the lack of apps nut just accounting.

    Multiuser is a great asset especially for home use. I run FreeBSD at home. I have root, and an accout for every member of my family. Each member has his own prefs. Each member has his/her pref. GUI. And best of all no one may change the configuration of the other.

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  115. Re:After the article... by edhall · · Score: 2

    It was hardly evident at the time that X would be the dominant non-MS windowing system. Sun itself had SunTools/SunView followed by its own Display PostScript-like system, NeWS. The latter predates NeXT's use of DPS by a couple of years. It flopped; Sun ultimately abandoned it, after bleeding much effort and money.

    And I have to disagree on the hardware angle. NeXT should have dropped the proprietary hardware angle long before it did; as it stands Jobs' insistance on an all-proprietary platform bled the company to the brink of bankruptcy, sacrificing efforts on the OS at a time when Microsoft had yet to obtain its total lock on the OS market. NeXTStep could have been a Windows-killer if the company had put all its effort into improving and marketing it (and providing more assistance to developers).

    We'll never know. Jobs didn't see that the window of opportunity for an all-proprietary platform that Apple had entered was closed -- closed by the accelerating market in commodity PC's on the low end, and a multitude of established Unix workstation vendors on the high end.

    -Ed
  116. he looks like... by MarNuke · · Score: 1

    ...steve jobs! HAHA!!

    --
    MarNuke
  117. Re:Revolutionary software at least... by ndpatel · · Score: 1

    IB lives on in mac os x as project builder--even the terminology of nibs and packages is the same. it's a lot of fun--the coolest bit is that it's essentially an interface to "classic" tools like gcc and the like. all the grunt compiler work is done by standard console tools, while project builder happily spends its cycles crafting the interface and links.

    obj-c is slowly dying--java and c++ (the mac standard) are apple's compatibility big push. hopefully, tho, as new, non-carbon apps get developed, we'll see rekindled interest in obj-c through the cocoa libraries. i personally think they should bring back pascal as the default language, as it was on the mac until the powerpc's. :)

    --
    london is drowning and i live by river
  118. Read the book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There was a good-- if very unfriendly-- book about the failure of NeXT called "Steve Jobs and the NeXT Big Thing." Basically, the writer accuses Jobs of turning the whole thing into a vanity project, resulting in a product that was hideously overpriced considering the performance it offered.

    some of the highlights:

    Jobs spent over a quarter million dollars on the NeXT logo (and an accompanying pamphlet exlaining its significance) before he had even done any product planning.

    Jobs insisted on the cube being manufactured as a perfect cube, even though it was exponentially more expensive to extrude and paint boxes with 90-degree corners than ones with slightly-off-90-degree corners.

    Jobs insisted on replacing the floppy drive with an MO drive, even though Sony wasn't ready to put them into production.

    Ironically, given the counterculture image jobs liked to project, their biggest ustomer was the CIA.

    The bottom line is that Jobs was trying to sell desktop machines at workstation prices, and that's what brought the company down.

  119. Web invented on NeXT by fmackay · · Score: 1

    See here for details. There's a NeXT cube in a glass case in a foyer at CERN, with a sign on it reading "World's first web server, 1992".

  120. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    It does sounds like NS.

    The UI, though, leaves me dizzy. It is nowhere near as simple and elegant as the Workspace and the Dock.

    --
    Max V.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  121. Another interesting character... by gilroy · · Score: 3
    From the Newsweek piece:
    To finance the rest of his venture, Jobs made some new friends. He persuaded Texas billionaire Ross Perot to invest $20 million in NeXT and sit on its board of directors, bringing respectability and expertise to the fledgling company.
    Isn't that interesting? Nowadays, I don't think anyone would bring on Perot to add "respectability"... :)
    1. Re:Another interesting character... by RevAaron · · Score: 2

      Another interesting tidbit about the Ross Perot/NeXT relationship goes thusly:

      One of the reasons Perot bought into NeXT because NeXT was doing all of their manufacturing in house, or more importantly, in the USA. Perot, as many can remember, was against NAFTA and is a big advocate of keeping business in America. He got really excited about a computer company that was making it's boards and boxes in the US, not some country in Asia.

      What's even more interesting is that when NeXT was not making any money making hardware, Perot, Mr. USA himself, advised that NeXT move their manufacturing operation overseas, to cut on costs.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  122. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by sabine · · Score: 1

    I've got a NeXT too, a slab/pizzabox, not a cube. I think it's cryingly beautiful and the UI is sleek and a dream to use; I want to network it to my Linux box and use it to lark about in C. Too bad it was marketed so awkwardly at the time it was introduced. I think it's great that Jobs is back at Apple and that the Mac and Mac/OS are adopting NeXT ideas (finally!) -- Apple will be a force to watch in the next year, IMO. Jobs may be a unique personality, but he's always had lots of good stuff up his sleeve.

  123. Ariel Ultra ;-) by mirko · · Score: 2

    There were also add-ons cards for the NeXT, The NeXTdimension, a color card for NeXTcube and also the Ariel . a multi-DSP card aimed at sound-manipulation. The IRCAM (famous French music institute) hadd a complete Ariel-powered NeXT network. Wow... These were more-than professional add-ons for what was already a more-than professional machine. :-)
    --

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  124. Sorry Emmett by jjr · · Score: 1

    But I think you look like Steve Jobs.

  125. Re:Ditto: Sorry Emmett by JammmGrrl · · Score: 1

    Yep. At the risk of being a "me too", I would have to vote yes, emmett looks like Steve Jobs.

    Maybe this should be a poll question, with links to the two pics as a part of the question so people can actually compare them side-by-side.

  126. Inverse hostile takeover - complete by justin_saunders · · Score: 1
    First Jobs brings in the engineers:
    ...then WebObjects.
    ...then OS X.
    and finally... the cube!
    Sigh. If only it were black.

    Cheers,
    Justin.

    --

    "My cat's breath smells like cat food." - The Tao of Ralph Wiggum.
  127. Re:Ditto: Sorry Emmett by JammmGrrl · · Score: 1

    Although.... If comparing between the two, I'd have to say emmett is cuter ;)

    Yes, babyface is cute :)

  128. Emotional Jobs... by active8or · · Score: 1

    'For a second he looks almost teary. "It's beautiful," he says softly.'

    Anybody saw the MW keynote?
    Steve Jobs is a very emotional person when it comes to computers....wonder how he managed to get married... ;P

    1. Re:Emotional Jobs... by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

      His computers are pretty emotional things! My heart still flutters a little when I think about the cube under my desk.

      --
      Max V.

      --
      There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
      Max V.
      NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  129. w0rd by Mr804 · · Score: 1

    NeXT is a nice little machine. You can still find them on ebay from time to time used at a good price.

  130. No, You don't look like steve jobs by imbrogilo · · Score: 1

    But disturbingly you look identical to my boyfriend.

  131. openstep.org by heh2k · · Score: 1

    check out the openstep web site. it's suppost to open "sometime june 1997". heh, and i thought *i* was lazy when it came to writing wed content.

  132. Revolutionary software at least... by stripes · · Score: 5
    both the hardware and software were revolutionary and represent one of the biggest missed opportunities in the industry

    I never owned a NeXT, but the University I went to bought into it big time, so I did spend a bit of time playing with them.

    The software was revolutionary. In many ways we are still catching up. Definitly in having a user friendly Unix we are still catching up. As little as I liked Objective C's performance, it did make things easy. Nice, nice, nice software. Good choice of bundled apps for an academic market too.

    The hardware was not stunning at all.

    If you sat it next to it's Sun's boxes of the era it was dog slow (if you ran SunTools at least -- if you ran X the display on the NeXT xould catch up). Both had equivolent resultion. The NeXT has 4bit (8bit?) grey. The Sun had either 1-bit deep mono, or 8bit color (which could do 8bit grey) depending on which graphics option you got. The NeXT had a 68030 (68040? 68020? mmmm, maybe the 68030) at something like 20Mhz. Sun had recently come out with the SPARC 1+ the follow on to the first desktop SPARC, 25Mhz I think. But much much much faster. Doing a whole lot more per cycle then the Moto part. The SPARC didn't feel a little faster it felt a lot faster.

    The few hardware features the NeXT had and nobody else did were not particurlay well recieved. The "floptical" was a bit fragile, and most people only had the one and no HD so it wasn't removable media, it was just a slow hard drive. The DSP never got used for anything intresting, the promised high speed modem was extreamly late, and I not sure it ever worked. About the only inovatave hardware feature I remember on the NeXT was the cubes looked way cooler then even the new SPARC pizza boxes.

    But the software, oh man was that software ahead of it's time...

  133. Re:Yes, I have a NeXT. by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    According to the NeXT newsgroups, they're still doing the y2k upgrades. The cool thing about it is that it's not just a patch CD... When I requested an OpenStep upgrade for my cube, I got: OpenStep 4.2/Mach for m68k and Intel, OpenStep 4.2 y2k Upgrade Patch CD, OpenStep Enterprise for Windows, and Enterprise Objects Framework. It was a pretty sweet deal, seeing how I actually run NeXTSTEP 3.3 on my cube, and I simply had to fill an email form with my cube's serial number and tell them I wanted OpenStep 4.2. :)

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  134. Re:Display PostScript is way cool by AJWM · · Score: 1

    Yeah, Suns had (have?) Display PostScript too. More than once I previewed a .ps file by 'cat'ing it to the screen device.

    --
    -- Alastair
  135. NeXT's programming env was great! by under_score · · Score: 2
    I have worked with NeXTs extensively. I started way back in 1991. I read about them in Time magazine, and instantly fell in love - I didn't know what Object Oriented programming was (I had heard of it though) - but those screen shots looked amazing. That summer, I had a job working for my university's computer services department, and got to hear about what was happening all over the campus, computer-wise. A NeXT was coming! I went and found out who the CompSci prof was who was going to be responsible for them. Turns out they were brought in to work on the development of a user interface for blind users - cool! I pestered the prof a whole bunch and ended up getting sent down to Redwood City, California for the NeXT Developer's Camp (I was a CompSci wiz so this wasn't a huge stretch: the University and I shared the cost of the trip and the registration), in exchange for which I was to help on the UI for blind users.

    So, my first real programming job was in an OO environment like none I have seen since. I am a highly paid Java consultant with now 9 years of solid development experience. I have never programmed professionally in any other paradigm but OO (not that I haven't experienced others: structural (C, Pascal), functional (Lisp, Miranda), other declarative (Prolog), etc. etc.). Objective-C is a cool OO language that has strong type checking, but also allows weak typing (remember id?). Dynamic runtime binding is the rule. Method invocations could be forwarded. Classes were true objects in their own right which meant that static methods could refer to self and access the _current_ class (kinda like this accesses the instance it occurs in, in Java).

    The Interface Builder tool, even in it's early iterations was incredibly slick. No friggin' unstable code generation - instead a really stable flexible system similar to Java's serialization, but more flexible because of the dynamic typing (don't tell me Java comes close). The UI for the interface builder was cool and putting together the GUI for a prototype app was often just a few moments of click and drag. It wasn't just painting: it was putting in the connections between the Controller and all the live gui widgets.

    Ahh... those were the days...

    WebObjects is a very similar environment for building web apps. It has an interface builder that is slightly different from the NeXTSTEP one, but also very flexible and powerful. And of course OSX will continue the legacy that is still unrivaled (AFAIK).

  136. Re:Jobs a failure? by carlos_benj · · Score: 2
    I thought that it was people like Woz that came up with the really cool stuff, and Jobs was just the man in the suit who sells it to the masses...

    I am not an Apple fanatic and have never even owned one of their products. I do have a Next machine that I got a year ago just for the novelty of it but don't really use it (except for the 'guess where the power button is' game). However, I have a great deal of respect for Woz AND Jobs. While Woz was the tech genius behind the creation of the Apple products (and arguably the PC industry as well), Jobs was just as much the marketing savant that opened the collective consciousness of the people to the possibilities of computing at home. I don't see the PC revolution happening with the speed it did without Jobs. He's a guy that thinks outside the box (I hate cliches) all the time.

    If Jobs were in the automotive industry, he'd have been the guy coming up with the Dodge Viper's look, but without performance you couldn't justify the Viper's price. That was the problem with Next. It absolutely reeked with cachet but that alone wasn't sufficient to drive sales at the price they were asking.

    --

    --

    As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.

  137. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

    Be is more similar to NeXT than you think...

    Yup! I'll agree. But is missing multiuser functionality (as per the last time I checked).

    (Funny, a $40 HP calculator and a sheet of paper works fine for me :)

    I used an adding machine app on NeXT. But when you have 1000 invoices a month. A stable acct system is required. I mean if we wish business to accept and adopt new OS's this is something we cannot do without. FreeBSD and Linux have the same problem but not as bad. I managed to find a good acct system from Silk for linux. A bit expensive. Missing some features for my purposes but quite good and the best part STABLE. we need more choice. It seems there are some good apps out there but beyond the price for small business.

    Translators. Just drag a new translator in to the appropriate folder....

    I guess I gotta try Be again....But I think in todays world multiuser environment is a must.

    Just grabbed a section of spreadsheet and pasted it into a word processor....

    How 'bout into a simple text editor like notepad?

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  138. The NeXT Optical Drive by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    I'm surprised I've not heard anyone else mention this yet. The original NeXT cube came with no hard drive- only an optical drive, which could handle 256 and 512 MB disks. Then they started coming with the OD for data and apps and 100 MB harddrives for the OS. Then they gave up on that and went just with harddrives.

    My cube has a working OD. Loud little sucker, it is. And slow, hence the move to harddrives. Just another bit of NeXT history for all you ignorant kiddies out there. :)

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  139. nostalgia by mirko · · Score: 2

    Anyone remembers Zila ? a utility rthat came with the machine and that was aimed at auto-distributing threads across a network.
    When using this feature with PhotoShop, we actually had a good time... :-)
    This was quite an elegant machine.
    --

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  140. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by freebe · · Score: 1
    Were you talking personal accounting (Quicken) or Accounting with a capital A? Most people in BeOS complain about lack of Quicken, which is just silly.

    StyledEdit can't handle spreadhseet stuff, but it would be possible to make a replicantized text editor and replicantized spreadsheet. Nobody's done it, but the architecture is there in the form of replicants. Gobe Productive is a seperate program, but very cool.

    BeOS may be going multiuser, but I'm opposed to it. I don't understand why a multiuser operating environment is such a must for a client operating system. I putz with my system enough that any account I make for me on a multiuser system is euid 0 anyway.

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  141. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by freebe · · Score: 1

    That's odd. I find BeOS to be one of the most elegant UI's ever, while NeXT is slightly less useable. And Aqua is a pure-and-simple abomination. I plan on permanently deleting the Aqua theme file from MacOS X (which reverts it back to a slick Platinum appearance).

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  142. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    Dude, have you ever actually used Aqua? It looks awfully tacky in GTK+/Sawmill themes, but the look and feel of it is, in my experience, not a hinderance whatsoever. Nor is it annoying.

    Also, deleting Extras.rsrc (the file to which you refer) makes is schizofrenic, not just revert back to a Mac OS X Server-esque platinum. But, have no fear! An Apple rep at MacHack (I believe) during a Q&A session confirmed that there will be some fascility for themeing in Mac OS X.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  143. Display PostScript is way cool by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    One of the things that I love most about NEXTSTEP is Display PostScript.

    I can use a drawing tool (like the fantastic Virtuoso.app [FreeHand for the NeXT]), and I know for sure that what I see on the screen is _precisely_ what will end up coming out of the printer.

    Other people talk about WYSIWYG, but the NeXTs give you _actual_ WYSIWYG. It's really impossible to comment on until used in person.

    --
    Max V.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  144. The DSP never got used for anything?!? by Art+Tatum · · Score: 1

    Are you kidding me? The NeXT was the greatest computer music platform ever designed! Stanford's CCRMA was (and may still be) using NeXT machines a couple of years ago. Only the Capybara has exceeded the power of the NeXT. The MusicKit (designed by David Jaffe and Julius Smith) is a hallowed word in DSP circles. IMO, the DSP was the most significant piece of equipment in the package.

  145. I Did Have The Opportunity. by istartedi · · Score: 1

    one of the biggest missed opportunities in the industry

    At the time, I was a student at UVa and had access to the Sun workstations, which ran X.

    A small room full of NeXT stations were donated and hooked to the network, and I could access my account from those too.

    Apple's famous increased ease of use wasn't there. It was just a different *NIX with some fancy crap on it. What really turned me off was that after logging in through that workstation, my home directory had some kind of wierd Library directory in it that I didn't put there.

    So, I went back to using the Sun stations.

    That said, I was never trained on them. I don't recall if any training was offered. If there were advantages, they were unknown to me. They simply plonked the boxes in a room to see if anybody would use them. I didn't see that many people using them.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  146. Ditto: Sorry Emmett by King+of+the+World · · Score: 1
    I agree.

    (sorry, i'm not about to justify my answer. He just does)

    1. Re:Ditto: Sorry Emmett by The+Iconoclast · · Score: 2

      I'll justify it... It's the chubby cheeks :-)

      Sort of makes them (emmet & steve) look baby-faced (not that that's a bad thing, some chicks dig that) :-)

      A wealthy eccentric who marches to the beat of a different drum. But you may call me "Noodle Noggin."

      --
      Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
  147. Yes, I have a NeXT. by DrQu+xum · · Score: 3

    I first used a NeXT my freshman year at tiny Westminster College (New Wilmington, PA) in 1996 and thought..."Man, why does this look a lot like a perverted cross between MacOS and Win95?" Then I realized that they were actually sitting on Mach. What a concept - a pleasing GUI with a break-out to a real command line & shell! And it could read/write from both MAC & DOS floppies! It had a MC68040, onboard sound, and a MC56000 DSP port, so it had the best bits of MAC hardware without actually running MacOS (oops, flamebait). And it had on-board SCSI, so I could connect my ZIP drive to it! I actually formatted two ZIP disks for under the NeXT filesystem, which I believe was actually 4.3BSD's UFS.
    I loved those machines.
    WC liquidated the NeXTs last year (our European friends are laughing at our college's initials, I guess. :) I bought a slab/monitor/keyboard/mouse/laser printer combo for US$25. It still runs NeXTStep 3.3 in my bedroom whenever I feel like breaking away from the evil OS.
    LONG LIVE NEXT!

    --
    DrQu+xum: Proof that the lameness filter doesn't work.
  148. William by magnum32 · · Score: 1

    So when did everyone start refering to William Gates as out good buddy "Bill".

  149. Attn. Solaris Users by freebe · · Score: 3

    If you want to see what NeXTStep (OpenStep) looked like, you can still download OpenStep for Solaris here. It includes a DPS server; just make certain you startx with -- -dpi 72. It should even run in iBCS under Linux (Sparc), though I haven't tried it.

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

  150. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MeNeXT · · Score: 1
    Well, that really isn't multi-user. That's multiple profiles. Windows 98 has the same concept...

    Yes and no. Win98 will alow you to start, destroy, and change almost anything. There is no security. But my point is that even a multiuser environment has a place at home and I can have a job running while my kids play games.

    However, multi-user adds a lot of complexity that really isn't needed if you just want to be able to have individual logins and preferences.

    It isn't comlex on NeXT. Very simple as a matter of fact.

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  151. Re:yes. OpenSTEP by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    Nope. While OpenStep is still in use, and people still develop for it, it doesn't run (nor did it ever, with the exception of within Apple) on PPC hardware. It runs on Intel and NeXT hardware (m68k - but *not* Macs!). NeXTSTEP 3.3 ran on NeXT hardware, Intel, HP PA-RISC, and Sun SPARC.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  152. Re:Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

    First of all, I think the concept of themes are ghastly. Call me undemocratic (and un-GNU), but I think that highly-paid HCI designers are far more capable of creating an effective and elegant UI than are a lot of Linux coders.

    Aqua is nice. I used it a little bit a few months back. Prolonged exposure might get a little tiring, but the BeOS GUI gets tiring quickly as well.

    The NS interface is timeless--I can use it for hours at a time and not get tired.

    --
    Max V.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  153. NEXTSTEP OS by kwclark · · Score: 1

    The company I work for signed on to NEXTSTEP in a big way in 1993. A lot of people don't realize, but after NeXT stopped selling hardware, it was ported it to Intel, HPPA, and Solaris. Actually is was rebranded as OPENSTEP by the time it was ported to Solaris but that is splitting hairs.

    Apple bought NeXT a long time ago now (1996?). Our company switched over to the dark side of the force at the same time. Our sales staff just could not sell NEXTSTEP no matter how great the application software was, and if you think about the timeframe, selling Apple was out of the question as well.

    I miss programming on NEXTSTEP, especially the Display Postscript.

    Ken

  154. Sun and NeXT by NickAubrey · · Score: 1

    I was at Sun when the NeXT machine came out; in fact I was some manager's brainstorm off-site at a swanky resort (which we got to use because Sun had rented it for board of directors meeting which McNealy had to cancel, and he couldn't get his money back. It was deluxe!). The people at this meeting were responsible for Sun's Object-oreinted software and GUI toolkit. We got ahold of the Jobs video and the functional specs and tried to decide how to respond. As I recall (this was a long time ago) we came to the decision that the hardware was way overpriced and the disk decision was a fiasco. Also the machine had too little memory. Also Jobs came off as an arrogant jerk, referring to himself as "we" as if he were the Queen of England. But right then and there we cancelled some software projects, and within a few weeks Sun and NeXT were announcing plans for joint software development.

    --
    Ultimate Geek NanoNovel: Acts of the Apostles at www.wetmachine.com Fear the Future! Defrock the Infodruids!
  155. Loved the INTEL port too! by zaytar · · Score: 1

    NeXTSTEP on Intel was pretty cool too. It required some pretty specific hardware at times or at least high quality parts (video cards in particular).

    But it inspired some cool PC hardware. I LOVED the all black Canon ObjectStation - the model 41 looked just like a NeXT slab. If I recall, even the floppy and CDROM were mounted on the side instead of the front. I'd KILL to have one of those now or to be able to build one!

    --
    /* ICBM Coordinates 32.78N, 79.93W */
  156. It's a great machine... by Spiral+Man · · Score: 1

    The NeXT was, and still is, a great machine...

    My father still uses one as a mail and file server where he works... In ten years he's only had to reboot it after power outages...

    --
    "we demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!" --Douglas Adams, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
  157. Used it, played with it, worked with it. by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

    Have not seen anything come close to it yet. Not Windowz, Not Linux, Not Solaris, Not Mac, nor even Be.

    Simple, clean and powerfull. Unfortunately very few apps. were available. Just finding a GOOD accounting package was a hassel (Never did find a reliable one). The standard apps (Spreadsheet, Word proc., Graphics) were easy enough to find but god forbid if you needed some thing special (Accounting, Payroll, Productivity).

    I miss their mail app the most. With the colorizer plugin you could sort out spam in seconds.

    Come to think of it, their drag and drop was amazing. Grab an image file and drop it into Tiffany (graphics app), and viola!! it opens. Cut any data format and past it into almost any app and it would handle it.

    Try grabbing a section of excel and pasting it in notepad...The results are just not the same....

    Still have one machine running OpenStep and use it from time to time. SOB!SOB! Hope Apple does it right!

    O.K. Time to get back to work........

    --
    DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
  158. Re:Yes, I have too much time on my hands. by DrQu+xum · · Score: 1

    From an Anonymous Coward who blatantly destroyed my post:
    I first used Windows '95 at my job in 1995 and thought..."Man, why does this look a lot like a perverted cross between MacOS and NeXTStep?" Then I realised that it was actually sitting on MS-DOS. What a concept - an ugly unusable GUI with a broken command line shell! And it could only read DOS floppies! It had a slow i80486, no onboard sound, and no DSP, so it had the best bits of PC hardware without actually running a real OS (oops, flamebait). And it had no on-board SCSI, so I couldn't connect much of anything to it. I actually tried to read some UFS disks in it, but ended up having to format the hard disk twice and reinstall Windows each time.
    I hated those machines.
    The DOJ liquidated Microsoft this year (our European friends have been laughing at us all along). I bought a new P3 with W2K for US $2500 anyway. It still crashes regularly whenever I feel like breaking away from the few things the evil OS company assumed I might want to do.
    DEATH TO MICROSOFT!
    (with apologies to the original poster and just about anyone else :)


    No apologies necessary. Anonymous Coward, I hold my beer up on high for you.

    --
    DrQu+xum: Proof that the lameness filter doesn't work.
  159. In case one didn't notice... by stefaanh · · Score: 1

    Whatever judgement may fall over a product that appears to have failed to reach its market, most important is that job done by the people involved with NextSTEP inspired me and many others.
    The technology ignited Java, mainstream OOD, distributed computing, was imitated to an extreme superficial level, and still is ahead of its time.
    The hype created around OO design and programming, by an incompetent industry, at that time, is partly responsible for strangling the real thing.
    The potential, the development paradigm, at that time was too different, too rich, too good, too soon.
    The elegance of the OO-frameworks, and the way apps and objects could talk to each other over the network, AFAIK, is still not matched neither in Open Source projects - besides maybe GNUStep - neither in Java's AWT. While NeXTSTEP / OPENSTEP objects are running around in a sweater, Bill's "objects" still need a wizard to get dressed(!), CORBA objects move around in armor, and others buy expensive tuxedo's to show off. And I fear .NET will be so sticky as a spiders web.

    But things evolve, money buys the looks, while the rest of us try to have the most fun at doing what we do best. Learn, play and work hard.

    And hope that we're doing the right thing right.

    BTW, for the french-speaking readers, this site is four you: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/NeXTSTEP/index.htm l

    --
    --------
    * Sigh *
    1. Re:In case one didn't notice... by stefaanh · · Score: 1

      Yes, in case: how few posts with low karma at this topic. Think!

      --
      --------
      * Sigh *
  160. Almost... [Re:Sorry Emmett] by joel.neely · · Score: 1

    Except for the $1k Nehru jackets and im-so-eurocool-designer-grey turtlenecks...