HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:10:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

>>>How much is MacRenderman going for these days? :-)
>>
>>Just as much as Steve Jobs decides it goes for.  Since Jobs owns 
>>both companies, it's hardly fair to point to Pixar's prices as proof
>>as NeXT's generosity.

>Nonetheless, you get what you pay for.

Actually, Renderman is now cheaper than I thought.  You can
get MacRenderman and Showplace bundled on CD-ROM (with a lot
of examples are other stuff from Pixar) for $266, which is
pretty reasonable.

So I guess since "you get what you pay for," you must believe
that Renderman isn't really worth very much?



Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: smytonj@pell4l24 (James Smyton)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Allegheny College
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:07:38 GMT

> But NeXT MUST lower prices at any rate, to remain competitive.  Perhaps  
> NeXT has realised that it can't make money playing the software price  
> game, but *can* make money in software.  Hence NS/486.  Could we be  
> looking at the last generation of NeXT hardware?
> 
> Hope not.  Black is cool.  :-)
> 
> --
> 
> Sean Luke
> Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
> sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
> NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome

I hope not too.  Disregarding personal feelings about the machines, I  
think their presence in the marketplace has done the other manufacturers a  
world of good.  Notice that after the NeXT cubes were released, both IBM  
and Apple gave up on their low end.  No more 000 chips for Mac!  The  
threat of a machine that could compete and be user friendly was a wake-up  
call for both companies.  

Note:  I think a IIvx would be infinitely cooler if the case were just a  
brushed aluminum finish!
--
J S  (smytonj@alleg.edu)
From: HLA@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: System 7 utilities needed
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:15:14 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

I am looking for a system 7 init that allows the finder to copy
in the background without clobbering performance as is the case
with out of the box system 7. Also, I would like to add
a command key sequence to the Hide <current application> menu
choice under the multifinder menu.

Any help is appreciated.

Mike Hite
MIKE@AGCS.PSU.EDU
From: aelman@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Adam Elman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac vs. PC
Date: 4 Nov 92 22:34:18 GMT
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA

x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:

>In article <torrie.720726145@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>, torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
>> aelman@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Adam Elman) writes:
>>>was barely even competing with the 8088 by 1984.  Remember, the IBM PC
>>>was introduced in 1981, the XT in 82 or 83 (I forget which) -- by the
>>>time the Mac came out, the AT was out and the 286 was the high-end
>>>microprocessor.  And as I have pointed out, a 286 machine is certainly
>>>as usable with current software as a Mac Plus is.
>> 
>>   The IBM AT came out in August 1984.  I have the Byte issue to prove it.
>> The Macintosh 512K came out in the same month, 7 months after the
>> Mac 128K.
>> 

>	But when did the Mac plus come out?

It would have had to be sometime in 1985.  Well after the AT came out.

Adam Elman
aelman@cs.stanford.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 9 Nov 92 13:01:56 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <16899EABB.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu>  writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.074751.12249@u.washington.edu>

>>Who cares if NeXT has N programs that do X, the Mac has 5N, and the IBM
>>PC clone has 25N?  All I care about is how good the best 1 or 2 are, so
>>I don't care if the PC has the most bad programs, and the Mac has the
>>second most bad programs, and the NeXT has the fewest bad programs.
>>
>So you don't want anymore software developed for the NeXT? You're
>happy with the current level? ;) Seriously, more software gives you
>a wider range of choices. Why limit your options?
>Its very nice to say you don't need choices when you don't have any!


Actually, NeXT needs software breadth more than depth.


--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 16:54:01 GMT

Jess M Holle writes
> Display Postscript is nice, but I don't think that that many people
> really NEED it or even lust after it greatly.  Besides, there are
> other GUI's whose screen displays are Postscript based.  Why not
> one of them instead of NeXT???

If you don't need it, maybe you shouldn't get it.  But NeXT has many  
other advantages too, including heavy-duty multitasking etc.  The OS  
is mich more powerful than MacOS, but has all the Mac's ease of use  
and inter-app integration (more, I think, but that's subjective).

> Why any of them with the price of UNIX
> software so high?  Yes, I know NeXT comes with a lot of software,
> but how much are the updates???  How much is it to buy WingZ on
> the NeXT?? (It's $190 for the Mac, educationally, $99 when I
> bought it)  What if there isn't a package in area X for the NeXT???
> 
The price of a lot of Unix software is high.  That's not true of a  
lot of NeXT software.  WriteNow is $89 edu, or $49 for a version  
without manuals.  Draw (a very nice drawing package) is $159/$89.   
WordPerfect is $150.  Improv, Lotus' new spreadsheet, is $179.  Mesa,  
a more traditional spreadsheet (which reads/writes 123 files, BTW) is  
seomthing like $100.  Many vendors have very attractive edu prices.   
Pride of place goes to Diagram! (an excellent diagram package and  
general drawing app) that sells for $25 to students.  Sure you can  
find some high-price items in the NeXT world.  Can't you in the Mac  
world?

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: the NeXT option (Was Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT)
Date: 6 Nov 92 08:11:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Nov6.081106.20895
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95

In article <1992Nov5.075315.2269@cubetech.com> andrew@cubetech.com writes:
>That is totally false.  cooperative multitasking is _always_ more
>efficient than premtive MT, *especially* when you have many threads
>and the load is high.  Why?  There is far less overhead in a
>cooperative MT system.

Change that _always_ to _often_.  I've built embedded systems where
this was NOT true.  Given a system where one must be able to guarantee
that each thread will get a certain fraction of the runtime, sticking

	if ( --TimeLeft == 0 )
	{
		TimeLeft = TICKS_PER_THREAD;
		SwitchThread();
	}

in the clock interrupt handler is going to be less overhead than
cooperatively multitasking, because cooperative multitasking will
end up doing more thread switches than are needed (it has to do
this to make sure that the guarantee is met).

Of course, embedded systems are a special case -- when building one,
one usually knows exactly what processes will be running (or at least
knows a lot about them), and so can tune things so that it works well.
I'm not disputing your statement if you restrict it to general-purpose
systems -- I just dispute the broad generalization.

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<1992Nov10.140059.17302@husc3.harvard.edu>
	<1992Nov11.041658.20627@cuug.ab.ca>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:10:53 GMT

Terrance> == Terrance Wilcox 260-8100 <wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca> 

 Terrance> How many people need another monitor (except for those of you cursed
 Terrance> with the Apple micro monitor)?

Maybe you need 24-bit color *and* a two-page display, but you can't
afford a 24-bit color two-page display...so you get a 13" 24-bit color
monitor and a 21" n-bit monochrome monitor, and appropriate cards.
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:35:34 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <1992Nov10.200750.22958@leland.Stanford.EDU>, spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:
> Ishir Bhan writes
>> How many people need DSP? 
> 
> If you'll never use the DSP, you won't consider the fact that the NeXT has 
> it as a point in its favor.   

This may sound weird (like I'm defending the NeXT -- perish the thought!),
but I think the question is mis-directed.

Most personal computers don't have DSP chips. Therefore, for the types of
applications and uses today, few people have "need" for the DSP. Indeed,
for the types of uses today -- the current machines are pretty much 
adequate for the task

This kind of question really begs another. What can we use the DSP for?

Apple has proposed using DSP for voice recognition (eg Casper), handwriting
recognition (eg Newton Technology). If we had that kind of DSP power 
available, perhaps we might use it for those things.

The problem in the NeXT camp is, while they have the DSP hardware, they
don't have the unique applications necessary to draw customers in.

The Mac had a good visual interface. That wasn't enough. It was the fact 
that the Mac invented the desktop publishing industry that made it a viable
platform in the marketplace.

The NeXT hasn't reached that threshold. The Amiga is just barely holding
on with Desktop Video. Do you see the real issue here?

-- 
Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958
Principal Software Engineer        ! Packet Radio: AA4LR @ W4QO
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. ! UUCP: uunet!hayes!bcoleman
POB 105203 Atlanta, GA 30348 USA   ! Internet: bcoleman%hayes@uunet.uu.net
Disclaimer: "My employer doesn't pay me to have opinions."
Quote: "The same light shines on vineyards that makes deserts." -Steve Hackett.

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:37:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov09.232013.28765@watson.ibm.com> arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew R. Southwick) writes:
>Hey, great!  Everyone should run out and buy a NeXT because they have
>a great development environment!  Even teachers and students writing
>term papers and people in the real world!  So they can program!
>
>There is more to using a computer than developing.  From a marketing
>standpoint, a great development environment is not a strong selling
>point.  Sure, it might appeal to people here on the net, but if the
>only people that buy NeXT's are programmers, then where can NeXT hope
>to go with their machines?  It will take years before these programmers
>start producing apps that the rest of the world will want to use.
>
>Next point, please.

we can't go to the next point because you missed this one.

NeXT is not marketing their machines to hackers like me.  They are
marketing them to large companies who wish to create a custom software
solution.  That's because there's a lot of neat word-processors and
spreadsheets for windows, but there's no good software, if any, for
doing what these companies primarily do - like commodities trading, or
running phone networks.  These companies feel they can gain a great
competitive advantage if they had custom software that was tailored to
their operations.  The reason why companies don't do this kind of
thing normall is because it's too expensive.  Not because the hardware
is expensive, but because it takes a long time, and you have to pay
expensive programmers for that time.  But with NeXSTEP, it takes less
time and less programmers and you end up with a better end-product.
That is what NeXT is marketing their software for, and NeXTSTEP is
better than anything else out there for this purpose, and guess what;
companies are buying it.


andrew
-- 
andrew@cubetech.com     | "Carpe Nocturn - I get more work done after
Andrew Loewenstern      |  2 a.m. than most people do all day."
Cube Technologies, Inc. |                          - Simson Garfinkel
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:16:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.140059.17302@husc3.harvard.edu> ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:

>Give me a break.  Since when does the NeXTStation Color have 5 NuBus
>slots?  PDS slots?  Who cares what I use them for?  That's irrelevant.  If
>you pay for them, then you cannot make a comparison.  I've seen an
>accelerator that will tkae the Q700 up to 33 mhz for around $500.  The Mac
>is STILL cheaper.  Sure, you don't get the DSP, but you get a more
>flexible video system (multiple monitors, etc.).  There are many uses for
>sltos.  Accelerators is one.  Special network boards (the Quadra has built
>in Ethernet, like the NeXT).  Data Aquisition boards (how many are there
>for the NeXT)?  PowerPC upgrades?  Future expansion?  The NeXTStation
>Turbo may run at the same speed as the Quadra 950, but you can make no
>direct comparison between the two in terms of price when one includes lots
>of expansion and the other - well - very little.

Oddly enough, as a NeXT owner, I don't need accelerator boards or special
network boards. As for data aquisition, what's the DSP port for?

PowerPC upgrades? Not likely. Future expansion? I'll buy a new, cheaper
machine (PowerPC maybe).
>
>How many people need DSP?  How about expansion for another monitor?  How
>about a QuickTime accelerator.  How about compression boards?  How about
>video input from video cameras?  How about VideoVision?  Accelerators?
>
>-- 
>             --      Ishir Bhan (ibhan@husc.harvard.edu)      --

How many people need another monitor (except for those of you cursed
with the Apple micro monitor)? There's already an external video input
device for the NeXT. Why would a NeXT user need a QuickTime accelerator?

Terry Wilcox
From: ibhan@husc10.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: The future of Apple
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:09:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc10.ibhan.721678175

I don't see your point.  The Newton and the PowerBooks perform entirely
different functions.  
-- 
             --      Ishir Bhan (ibhan@husc.harvard.edu)      --
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 17:07:15 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.174837.7930@cuug.ab.ca> wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100) writes:
>In article <1dkka9INNgm1@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> cl871@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Simon B. Woodside) writes:

>>My information is that NeXT (and all UNIX software) is more
>>expensive and more space consuming than mac software.  Sometimes
>>the difference is great.

>I don't think I have any software that takes up as much space as MS Word.
>Come to think of it, WriteNow, Edit, and FrameMaker combined don't take
>up as much space as Word.

Word is an exceptionally bloated program.  Framemaker takes less room than
Word on the Mac, too.  However, when I write a smallish C program, the 
executable always seems to end up significantly smaller on the Mac than on 
the SUN.  Is this also the case for the NeXT?

>NeXT software costs more than Mac software because the market is smaller.
>Mac software costs more than DOS software because the market is smaller.

None of the Mac software that I have costs more than the DOS equivalent
with the exception of MPW, which coming from Apple is an obvious exception.

Jess Holle
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: IIvx speed?
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:41:33 GMT
Reply-To: hades@Dartmouth.Edu
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Disclaimer: Personally, I really don't care who you think I speak for.
Moderator: Rec.Arts.Comics.Info

alana@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Thomas Alan Akins) writes:

>In talking with people around here who work with and sell Macs, they say that
>their vx does run slower than even an si on many occasions.

    While it is true that the IIvx is "saddled" (I readlly hate the term
crippled) with a 16MHz system bus, there is no way that it runs slower
than an Identically Configured IIsi. The problem with the tests that
have compared the IIsi and the IIvx is that the machines have been
configured differently, and the only tests that I have personally seen
comparing these 2 machines had the IIvx running a beta verson of 7.1.


--
-Hades (Brian V. Hughes) 
		      "No sir, I didn't like it."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!) 
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 05:52:43 GMT

RH> == Ricardo Hernandez | 802-36-4453 <raist@rmece02.upr.clu.edu> 

 RH>    I think that the Mac being expensive is not an image problem...
 RH> it is a REAL problem.  How can a MAC LC-II with a 68030 @ 16Mhz
 RH> with a 16-bit crippled bus, 2 megs of ram, 40 (or 50) meg hardisk,
 RH> can compete in terms of hardware with a 486sx @ 20Mhz with SVGA
 RH> monitor, 80+ megs of hardisk, 4 megs ram for the same price?  Or
 RH> with an Amiga 3000 for that matter?

You can't get an LC II with less than 4M, unless you desolder the chips
from the motherboard (as if that would work anyway).

A 4/80 Performa 400 is $1300 at Lechmere, sans monitor.  Monitor's
another few hundred dollars, ($300?) as I recall, not too much.  As for
"crippled bus", well, what's the "sx" for?  That's a crippled chip,
after all.

Now, how much is that name-brand 486SX/20 with monitor?
--
Christopher K. Davis      | ``Usenet seems to run much like the Kif (or,
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   |   for the TV generation, Klingon) high command.
System Administrator, EFF |   Whoever takes action and can be heard wins.''
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   |   --Peter da Silva <peter@ferranti.com>
From: smytonj@murr13.alleg.edu (James Smyton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:27:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: pellns.1992Nov9.152700.20818
Organization: Allegheny College

In article <1dl556INN88j@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> ovrskeek@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (I am  
the OVER-skeek!) writes:
> smytonj@pell4l24 (James Smyton) writes:
> 
> >040 machine.  Besides on the NeXT Station Turbos over in Quigley  
Hall(The  
> >Econ. department on our campus) the info panel shows that the machine  
runs  
> >at 30mhz.  Apple has 030s that run faster than that! Convincing me to  
buy  
>             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Your L.O.E. is showing! :-)
> 
> ------------------
> ovrskeek@matt.ksu.ksu.edu

Let me qualify my point...I misstated my point by saying the quote about  
the 030's.  I realize the difference in real speed of the two machines.  I  
do however feel that NeXT does not take full advantage of it's 040 chip's  
speed capability.

--
J S  (smytonj@alleg.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: Sculley considered for Clinton's Sec. of Commerce
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:21:17 GMT

In article <16897EDF4.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>>
>Nope, Perot is an IBM man... he was an IBM rep before founding EDS,
>where they used IBM mainframes. All he has to do with NeXT is as an
>investor... Didn't he pull his money out of NeXT? smart man...
>;) ;) ;) ;)
> 
>Mark Eaton                    | Opinions? We're not allowed to have
>UC525655@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU | opinions at Mizzou... get back to me
>                              | in 2 years when I graduate... ;)

Nope, Perot owns 13% of NeXT. Still a smart man.

Clinton doesn't want Sculley (maybe Coke does though). 
Clinton wants the head of HP.

Terry Wilcox

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 04:25:47 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.142600.17304@husc3.harvard.edu> ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:
>
>Hey, I have a SupraFaxModem which will soon have voice support.  Fax
>software is available to support the modem now.  Voice software will be
>when voice support is added.  How would I use this on the NeXT?  Nuff
>said.  These are the kind of shortcomings I'm talking about.  
>
>-- 
>             --      Ishir Bhan (ibhan@husc.harvard.edu)      --

What shortcomings? Fax works on the NeXT. Fax software is built in for 
some modems and is commercially available for the Zyxel and Supra modems.
When voice support is added to these modems, someone will use the
Phone Kit to add voice support.

In any event, modems are old news. With the Hayes ISDN eXTender (which
costs less than a SupraFaxModem) I can turn my NeXT into a fully featured
voice mail system on POTS lines.

When I get ISDN (June 1, 1993) I can add two 64 kbps channels (without
compression). How's that for service?

Terry Wilcox

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:01:57 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Nov11.034846.25700@leland.Stanford.EDU> spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:

>> A program developed by another company owned by Steve Jobs.  Not
>> surprising that the NeXT version is so cheap.

>Whatever its origins, WriteNow/NeXT is now marketed by a company that  
>has no links to Steve Jobs.  Besides, what if it did?  As long as you  
>can get software cheap, who cares. 

Oh, I thought you were using this an *example*.  To show that a
*typical* NeXT program is affordable.  In that case, it was a bad
example, since it was developed by a division of Steve Jobs, Inc.,
which can see to it that NeXT users get a good deal no matter who
does the actual marketing.  But if all you meant was that there's 
one NeXT application that cheap, oh, well, I'm impressed.


>> >Many vendors have very attractive edu prices.   
>> 
>> And many people do not qualify for edu prices. 
>> In fact, (brace yourself, this may come as a shock to you) 
>> *most* people do not.
>> 
>Oh give it a break.  The original poster cited Mac edu prices, I  
>cited NeXT edu prices back.

Oh, wow!  And I have a friend who works for Microsoft.  She says
she can get Microsoft Word, or any other MS program, for under $30.
Let's compare that to NeXT's employee discounts.  Let's be as silly
as we possibly can.