This is NeXT-not-open-architecture? in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 20-Dec-1989 15:41:27 From: eht@f.word.cs.cmu.edu (Eric Thayer) Subject: NeXT not open architecture? 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.
Date: Sun 21-Dec-1989 22:23:44 From: 6600pete@hub.UUCP Subject: Re: NeXT not open architecture? > 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? Well, I could say that 4 slots is not enough. But that's a lame scramble to keep the egg off of my face. Rather, I direct you to the message headed "Egg on my face" somewhere around here. If you would like to argue this point in its current incarnation, take a look at alt.religion.computers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pete Gontier | InterNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu, BitNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa Editor, Macker | Online Macintosh Programming Journal; mail for subscription Hire this kid | Mac, DOS, C, Pascal, asm, excellent communication skills
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.