Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Benchmarks (was Re: Read the fine print!)
Message-ID: <1990Sep25.171941.5867@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <15640002@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com> <15640004@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 90 17:19:41 GMT

In article <15640004@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com> sritacco@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Steve Ritacco) writes:
>Even if the slab couldn't have an expansion slot, couldn't the CPU board
>have been the same as the cube so that you could by an empty cube and
>a NeXTdimension...

Boards with chips on them are cheap.  Boxes are expensive.  You probably
would not save very much.  It would also drive up the price of the slab.
The reason why people build closed-box low-end systems, with no bus, is
that it is easier and cheaper to build the hardware when you have complete
control and don't need to allow for a wide range of unknown add-in boards.
-- 
TCP/IP: handling tomorrow's loads today| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
OSI: handling yesterday's loads someday|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry