Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!crdgw1!uunet!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: Amiga OS *IS* state of the art, but the NeXT is better Message-ID: <1991Apr3.190802.11055@sugar.hackercorp.com> Date: 3 Apr 91 19:08:02 GMT References: <1991Apr2.192023.26598@sugar.hackercorp.com> Distribution: usa Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX Lines: 16 In article melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes: > 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. They still sold more machines in the first year than NeXT. How is NeXT's great marketing doing? What are the final sales figures on the Cube, and how do they match up to the 100,000 Amiga 1000s (let alone the 2,000,000 Amiga 500s)? The NeXT has all the advantages and disadvantages as the Amiga did, and it's not selling as well... that tells me my analogy is pretty much on the mark. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' .