Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!ewright
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: What if ? was:Re: Not another NeXT defector???!!!
Message-ID: <108420@convex.convex.com>
Date: 8 Nov 90 17:32:48 GMT
References: <2909@unccvax.uncc.edu> <396@goya.dit.upm.es>
Sender: usenet@convex.com
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation; Richardson, TX
Lines: 29

In article <396@goya.dit.upm.es> esink@turia.dit.upm.es (Eric Wayne Sink) writes:
>Let's look at the situation two or three years from now.  If the
>"killer development platform" on the NeXT is that great, than
>there should be lots of software.  

1) Companies do not spend hundreds of thousands of dollars
   developing software for a machine simply because it has
   a "killer development environment."  They will do it only
   if they see a market.  With an expensive, high-end machine
   like the NeXT, you have to sell programs for big $$$ to 
   survive.  The lack of inexpensive software keeps more users
   from coming to the machine.   

2) "Than" is not the same word as "then."  Not in Pascal, 
    not in English.  Please fix your syntax. :-)

>The IIfx is ridiculous.  

Yes, but everybody knows that.  Harry Anderson made the joke
that IIfx stands for "too fucking expensive."  Nevertheless,
this machine, which has been a sales disappointment to Apple,
is the standard by which NeXT's prices are judged.

In about six months we should see 68040-based accelerator
boards for the Mac II.  About six months after that we
should see cheap "brand X" 68040 boards.  Adding one of
these to a IIsi will give you a machine that blows away
the IIfx and is at least competitive with the NeXT for
far less money.