Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!uh2
From: UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: What NeXT *should* do next.
Message-ID: <90085.163558UH2@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 26 Mar 90 21:35:58 GMT
References: <1378@shelby.Stanford.EDU> <9967@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
 <424@toaster.SFSU.EDU> <Eqe
 <Emg0qn3@cs.psu.edu> <260d50a2.19ff@petunia.CalPoly.EDU> <Eu.gfw3@cs.psu.edu>
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 8

There would be large costs in changing or adding a new CPU to the NeXT
equation at this time.  Don't forget that an organization's technical
expertise is an important asset, and much of NeXT's current expertise
is with the 680x0, not some new chip.  New chips mean new compilers,
new debuggers, new bugs, and a whole new set of neural pathways.

I say, go with what you already know til proven wrong.  (And then,
go chapter 11 8-).