Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!MathWorks.Com!news2.near.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!news.mit.edu!bdc
From: bdc@blackjack.ai.mit.edu (Brian D. Carlstrom)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Subject: NeXTStep better than *BSD? (was Re: 4.4-lite?)
Date: 20 Jul 1994 00:11:48 GMT
Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <BDC.94Jul19201148@blackjack.ai.mit.edu>
References: <2vgvc7$3tg@spruce.cic.net> <3097eh$m2h@pdq.coe.montana.edu>
<Bs2yi5F.dysonj@delphi.com>
<michaelv.774429899@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>
<30fh47$94i@pdq.coe.montana.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: blackjack.ai.mit.edu
In-reply-to: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu's message of 19 Jul 1994 03:25:59 GMT
>> Nate Williams writes:
> Not even close. That would be NextStep. :-)
i'm glad your joking. after using NetBSD and 386BSD, i've been spoiled
into having a somewhat decent environment. (I'm sure FreeBSD is just as
good) This summer I started using NeXTStep for work, and it just makes
we want to puke. Sure all the interface stuff is sooooo cool, but the
underlying BSD is aweful.
Well, maybe someone will do a free OpenStep implementation for the
*BSD's... Or is someone already?
-bri