Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:44795 comp.sys.next:4479
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!uhura.cc.rochester.edu!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!f.word.cs.cmu.edu!eht
From: eht@f.word.cs.cmu.edu (Eric Thayer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.next
Subject: NeXT not open architecture?
Message-ID: <7362@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 20 Dec 89 15:41:27 GMT
References: <23147@brunix.UUCP> <3362@hub.UUCP>
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 12

In article <3362@hub.UUCP> 6600pete@hub.UUCP writes:
>Rather, I was trying to show that putting Ether on the motherboard and not
>also including enough open architecture features was probably not the best
>design decision.

In what way is the NeXT lacking in open architecture features?  If you mean
that they have lagged in getting a Bus interface chip to hardware developers
I can agree.  But otherwise, pending development of the hardware, you can
plug anything you want in the remaining slots.
-- 
Eric H. Thayer      School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
(412) 268-7679      5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213