Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!usenet From: Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc Subject: Re: If I read one more Next article. . . Message-ID: <$-+&QC&@rpi.edu> Date: 12 Feb 91 23:55:37 GMT References: <1991Feb9.205516.26404@jhereg.osa.com> <44081@ut-emx.uucp> <1991Feb12.223252.23864@cs.dal.ca> Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Lines: 23 Nntp-Posting-Host: gilead.its.rpi.edu In article <1991Feb12.223252.23864@cs.dal.ca> graham@ug.cs.dal.ca (Michael Graham) writes: ...(skipping along)... >Here Here!! I agree fully. Mac magazines regularily report on what is going >on in the NeXT world and do comparisons - the same should be done here. > The Mac magazines use the right titles for their discussions. If the article is about Next, it will say so in the subject. They will not have an article titled "68040 for the Mac?" which concentrates on the NeXT vs Mac debate. NeXT fans will promote their favorite machine no matter what the topic of the subject thread is. This means that readers constantly have to filter out the articles, no matter what the subject is. This is a waste of time, especially for people who simply can not buy a NeXT machine right now even if they wanted to. They also keep a sense of Mac-balance. Mac people are interested in what good-old (or bad-old) Steve Jobs is up to, but the magazine knows that people do not buy their Mac magazine simply to read about NeXT. There are times when the non-Mac traffic in this newsgroup exceeds the mac-related traffic (that's probably not true at the moment, but it does happen). - Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu