Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!ames!killer!texbell!bigtex!nueces!chari
From: chari@nueces.UUCP (Chris Whatley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Selling through Businessland
Summary: Actually...
Keywords: NeXT, RISC, MACH, multiprocessing, bundled software
Message-ID: <245@nueces.UUCP>
Date: 4 Apr 89 19:42:51 GMT
References: <1554@neoucom.UUCP> <121@dg.dg.com> <1749@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> <123@dg.dg.com>
Lines: 27

In article <123@dg.dg.com>, rec@dg.dg.com (Robert Cousins) writes:

While the endless arguments about new processors & speed vs. old processors
& compatibility are no more intersting than ever, I have to nitpick here...

> I disagree.  There are not currently more than 40 developers working
> to develop NeXT compatible hardware and software offerings of the class
> and magnitude of those in 88/Open.  The list of ISV's supporting the
> software initiative includes:
>[list of developers] 
> Not bad, huh?

No, not at all except you are wrong about Next's development agreements. At 
a recent press conference, Jobs said "85" companies are developing hardware
and software for the Next. As for class and magnitude, I'm sure they are
quite similar since many of the companies you listed and many of the companies
that develop for Next are either the same company (Absoft, etc.) or are porting
some garbage from MS-DOS (Lotus & WordPerfect).

> Robert Cousins
> Speaking for himself, not DG.

Chris 
-- 
--
Chris Whatley
{uunet,cs.utexas.edu}!bigtex!nueces!chari