Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uwm.edu!psuvax1!news From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Amiga OS *IS* state of the art, but the NeXT is better Message-ID: Date: 3 Apr 91 02:53:29 GMT References: <7827@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> <86aJZ2w164w@ozonebbs.UUCP> <1991Apr2.192023.26598@sugar.hackercorp.com> Sender: news@cs.psu.edu (Usenet) Distribution: usa Organization: Penn State Computer Science Lines: 21 In-Reply-To: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com's message of 2 Apr 91 19:20:23 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: sunws5.sys.cs.psu.edu In article <1991Apr2.192023.26598@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes: No. Most developers will continue to develop for MS-DOS and Windows. The NeXT and Amiga are both way back in the race, with the Mac in an intermediate position (and holding it largely through the clever use of lawyers). All the arguments about the technical excellence of the NeXT apply equally well to the technical excellence of the Amiga over the past 5 years. See how well that's worked... I don't care if most developers continue to develop for DOS machines as long as some good developers write software for the NeXT. The Mac is still the best(IMHO) computer for WP and DTP. The Amiga lost because it was branded a GAME MACHINE, the user interface didn't/doesn't look as good/professional (Zzzz) as the Macs, and it used to GURU meditate a little too much. Lest we forget, Commodore didn't know how to market the machine either. -Mike