HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew R. Southwick)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 23:20:13 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14g by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: arsouth@watson.ibm.com (Andrew R. Southwick)
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In <1992Nov8.074751.12249@u.washington.edu> tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
>That said, I don't think that is what the original poster meant by
>software being NeXT's selling point.  I think he was talking about
>their software development tools.  These are supposed to be really
>good (I've only played with NeXTs for a few minutes at the bookstore,
>so I can't say if these claims are accurate).

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.

>--Tim Smith
(Notice that this is not a flame on Tim, merely the original poster
 that I could not identify (not quoted in the above article).)

These views are my own; behaviorists can stick THAT up their ***!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew R. Southwick
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:17:30 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu
Distribution: na

In article <ewright.721438947@convex.convex.com>  writes:
>In <1992Nov10.100620.1131@yvax.byu.edu> feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)  
writes:
>
>
>>The last was $300.  And that included Renderman, the DBKit, AppleShare,  
>>Mac file system compatibility, and Novell client software in addition to  
>>all other things NeXT.  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.



>>>What if
>>>there isn't a package in area X for the NeXT???
>
>>There are three.
>
>I think the X there is a variable, which can stand for any
>application.  He does not mean X-Windows.


Ah.  Sorry--my misunderstanding.


--

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: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:31:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.140943.11034@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle) writes:
>I already posted this once, but it appears that it didn't get through.
>
>The NeXT OS is a hog, even WITHOUT the overhead of Display Postscript.
>Recent tests showed A/UX running on a 25 MHz 040 was SUBSTANTIALLY
>faster than the NeXT OS on a 25 MHz 040.  Unless you NEED UNIX or run
>LOTS of processes simultaneously (and actually need/want to do so,
>rather than the "but can it run 30 useless daemons at once?" thing),
>the Mac OS is faster than A/UX, so the Mac OS should blow the NeXT OS
>away.  The tests were non-graphical in nature to avoid the Display
>Postscript part of the equation.  I believe that they appeared in
>Byte SEVERAL months ago.
>
Maybe the tests were non-graphical to avoid System 7 :). I'd
love to see these results. Can you tell us where to find them?

As for useless daemons, UUCP is great. Too bad Mac's aren't advanced
enough to have any decent, easy to use UUCP software. 

>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???  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???

If DPS isn't needed, how come everybody is coming out with a DPS-like
imaging model? What will Taligent use?

Why did the cost of Mac software used to be so high?

>
>As for NeXT's development system, doesn't the use of Objective C make
>porting to the rest of the world a might bit difficult???  On all other
>platforms C++ seems FAR more dominant.  It would appear to be MUCH
>easier to recode member functions here and there rather than rewrite 
>the whole mess in another language.  Any comments???????
>
>Jess Holle

As for the Mac's development system, doesn't the Mac Toolbox (and Apple
litigation) make porting to the rest of the world a bit difficult?

You can use C++ on the NeXT. If you knew anything about software development
on the NeXT, you wouldn't have to ask silly questions :).

Terry Wilcox
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: 10 Nov 92 03:17:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: yvax.1992Nov10.101714.1134
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu

In article <1992Nov10.034039.10761@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>  writes:

>These tests were non-graphical in nature to negate
>the Display Postscript overhead arguement.  I believe that I saw these
>results in Byte among other places.
>
>This seems to indicate that the NeXT OS is a sloth to some degree.  Even
>without its slower graphics, its kernal has a lot of unecessary overhead.
>Given that the Mac OS is generally a fair amount faster that A/UX, except
>in cases where lots of processes are fighting for processor time, this
>means that a Quadra running the Mac OS should out run a NeXT rather  
handily.


The NeXT's Window Server (DPS system) probably takes up 30% of the  
processing power of the machine.  It sounds like testers said, "hey, let's  
just run some tests with the Window Server still on but *not* use  
graphics."  Doesn't wash.

It's my understanding that there are two Mach-based UNIX clones available  
for the Mac.  How fast are they?  This might give a better idea of Mach's  
speed compared to A/UX.

A/UX is a nice fast implementation of UNIX.  But I'd like to see some  
credible tests.

--

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: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 00:05:11 GMT

Edward V. Wright writes
> >Of course everybody doesn't need an 040 machine.  For those who
> >do, the NeXT is an excellent choice.  
> 
> What about the people who need an '040 but can't afford a NeXT.
> You can say that those people can't afford a Quadra, either, but
> that's beside the point.  A person who needs an '040 but can't 
> afford one can still get *some* of his work done on a IIsi. He
> can't get any done on the NeXT (which he can't afford to buy).
> 
Fair enough.  Except if this hypothetical person is that pressed for  
cash, they might be well advised to buy a 486; they won't have the  
interface advantages of Mac or NeXT, but they'll have power  
equivalent or better than an 040 box at a price in the IIsi range.

> Besides, there are cheaper accelerator boards for the Mac and
> good reason to believe that Apple will reduce the price of '040-
> class machines early next year.  NeXT seems to have no intention
> of reducing the price of entry-level machines ever.  

Apple dropping its 040 prices tomorrow will not help you if you buy a  
mac IIsi now.  If you expect prices to drop, then wait till the last  
possible minute to buy anything, and then buy the best you can afford  
at the time that you can no longer wait.  It might be a IIsi.  It  
might be a NeXT.  It might be a newly discounted Quadra 400 (or  
whatever).

--
-
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: maynard@groo.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley)
Subject: Re: Sculley considered for Clinton's Sec. of Commerce
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:41:12 GMT


>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
>

Right, the guy who endorsed Bush. I'll believe that when I see him
appointed, no earlier.

Maynard Handley
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jbailey@world.std.com (james d bailey)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 04:02:04 GMT

wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100) writes:

>In article <CKD.92Nov11161051@loiosh.eff.org> ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>>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.
>>--
>If you need 24 bit color and a two page display, it's likely cheaper
>to buy a 21" monitor with a 24 bit color card. If you need both, you
>likely need them both at the same time.

>Terry Wilcox

Have you priced color 21" monitors recently?  My Quadra 900 can run a
monochrome 2 page display for well under $1000.  A 21" (1152x870)
color monitor is going to run close to three times that.  A 24-bit
card and 13" color monitor will run about $800.  Not even close.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:23:29 GMT

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.

nah, NeXT software overall costs around what Macintosh software costs.
You are right, though, most workstation software is really expensive,
but it's not like that on NeXTSTEP.


andrew
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Date: 11 Nov 92 08:40:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: yvax.1992Nov11.154001.1141
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu
Distribution: na

In article <ewright.721439240@convex.convex.com>  writes:
>In <1992Nov10.165401.23447@leland.Stanford.EDU>  
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola) writes:
>
>
>>The price of a lot of Unix software is high.  That's not true of a  
>>lot of NeXT software.  WriteNow is $89 edu, 
>
>A program developed by another company owned by Steve Jobs.  Not
>surprising that the NeXT version is so cheap.

WriteNow for the NeXT is made and marketed by AppSoft, which is not owned  
by Steve Jobs.


--

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: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Reply-To: mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, UT
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:03:08 GMT

  > >>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!

  > It's funny...  now all the Macintosh people are saying exactly what
  > all the PC people said when Macintosh came out...  you guys forget too
  > quickly...


  > andrew

Lack of good software was a valid point then and it still is now.  What's
different between the PC argment and the Mac argument is that the Mac
only had a few excellent applications compared to a large collection of
less impressive PC applications.

Now, the Mac has a large collection of excellent applications, and the 
others have a smaller subset of poorer applications, and an even smaller
base of equivalent applications.


Just look at the Amiga.  Lots of titles, but the quality is inferior.  But
hey, it was cheaper!  What a deal!?

[MGM]
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: jduncan@scott.skidmore.edu (john duncan)
Subject: Re: Mac 128K a complete dog (WAS Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!))
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:19:15 GMT

mike@maths.tcd.ie (Mike Rogers) writes:
> In article <1992Oct28.192049.13390@javelin.sim.es.com>, mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson) wrote:
> >'cute' would be better used to describe the Amiga environment.  What
> >other computer would have "Guru" errors, or a "Kick-Start" disk.
> 
> Guru errors are a feature. No more mysterious lockups with no explanation
> during a long Quark lino output.
> 
> And there haven't been "Kick-Start" disks since 1986. You want we should 
> complain about SCSI support on Mac 128Ks? And what about that Lisa/Mac XL.
> Completely nonstandard. I mean, really!
	Yeah, but the 128 came out in 1983... That was great for the
time, and ran on a 68000. Nowadays the amiga is still plagued by
incomplete HD support and a cheezy CLI with a 'workbench' windowing
system. Trying to add amix to any amiga is hell, without even getting
into the slowness, and the 4000 probably isn't compatible with
anything anyway. I also can't believe that you brought in the
lisa/macXL... That was a considerable upgrade path from a lisa, giving
a lisa users a mac rom with a meg of memory(and how much did the
un-upgradeable original amiga have). Also, macintoshes have meen
pretty much upgradeable since the 512, which could upgrade to a 512ke
or a plus(1meg) and then the SEs after that had upgrade cards. Now,
the quadras have 2 or 5 nubus 32-bit slots that can be used for
anything plus an 040 direct slot. They also include TRUE 24bit
color(not just a pallette style, unlike the amiga 4000) on the board,
ethernet FriendlyNet (can be used for 10base 5,2, or T) and full
speed.
		
> -- 
> Mike Rogers,Box 6,Regent Hse,##EveryoneHasTheRightToFreedomOfOpinionAndExpressio
> TCD,EIRE. <mike@maths.tcd.ie>##nThisRightIncludesFreedomToHoldOpinionsWithoutInt
> ###############################erferenceAndToSeekReceiveAndImpartInformationAndI
> deasThroughAnyMediaAndRegardlessOfFrontiers...#10 UN Declaration of Human Rights

		Just excersizing my right to freedom of opinion and
expression. 
:)
John
jduncan@skidmore.edu





-- 
-------------------------------------------
jduncan@skidmore.edu
soon to be at jduncan@bbs.integrity.com

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 11:17:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.000511.23181@leland.Stanford.EDU> spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu writes:
>Fair enough.  Except if this hypothetical person is that pressed for  
>cash, they might be well advised to buy a 486; they won't have the  
>interface advantages of Mac or NeXT, but they'll have power  
>equivalent or better than an 040 box at a price in the IIsi range.

Not so...  soon you can get a cheap 486 and run NeXTSTEP on it.  You
can't tell the difference.  Not much of a reason to buy "True Black"
hardware except that it looks cool (unless you are heavy into Music
Kit or do signal processing).


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: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:42:27 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 <1992Nov10.100620.1131@yvax.byu.edu> feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke) writes:


>The last was $300.  And that included Renderman, the DBKit, AppleShare,  
>Mac file system compatibility, and Novell client software in addition to  
>all other things NeXT.  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.


>>What if
>>there isn't a package in area X for the NeXT???

>There are three.

I think the X there is a variable, which can stand for any
application.  He does not mean X-Windows.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: NeXT OS, TOO SLOW TO $#@#$, etc.
From: feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)
Date: 13 Nov 92 15:53:55 -0700
Reply-To: sean@digaudio.byu.edu
Distribution: na

In article <ewright.721599308@convex.convex.com>  writes:
>In <1992Nov11.154001.1141@yvax.byu.edu> feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke)  
writes:
>
>>WriteNow for the NeXT is made and marketed by AppSoft, which is not  
owned
>>by Steve Jobs.
>
>Rewrite history how you will.
>
>[stuff on WriteNow for the Mac]

WriteNow was developed for the _MAC_ by Steve Jobs' firm, and marketed by  
T/Maker.  But that is not what I said.  I said "Writenow for the NeXT".   
WriteNow 2.0 for the NeXT was written with the help of Jobs' firm, and  
distributed free on the NeXT until this year.  Then it was sold to  
Appsoft, a startup company headed by an ambitious marketer, Randy Adams.   
NeXT unbundled it from the NeXTSTEP 3.0 release because they felt WriteNow  
on the NeXT had prevented good word processors from showing up on the  
platform, much as MacWrite had done in 1985.

Appsoft has contracted with others (read: not NeXT or Steve) to design  
WriteNow 3.0 for the _NeXT_, and is marketing it alone.  Steve Jobs and  
NeXT cannot easily incite Appsoft to market cheap software, or they'll  
have the NeXT development community (in the NeXT community, a powerful  
force indeed) on their tail.  WriteNow is _still_ selling reasonably  
cheaply though.

This is the history of WriteNow on the NeXT (as far as I understand it :)


--

Sean Luke
Brigham Young University                   MILK:  It Comes From Cows
sean@digaudio.byu.edu  
NeXTmail and nifty Mac stuff welcome
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!)
Date: 11 Nov 92 18:30:59 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <199211060152.AA00327@hobbes.cuc.ab.ca>, rob@hobbes.cuc.ab.CA (Rob Parkhill) writes:
> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>>
>>Like on the NeXT or Windows, where extra buttons are simply undefined -- it
>>is up to the applications to use them as they see fit. Hence, applications
>>either a) don't use them or b) use them in inconsistant ways hence, c) users
>>don't use them.
> 
> In NeXTSTEP, the second mouse button can be enabled to bring up the menu
> under the pointer wherever you are on the screen.  

You are correct.

However, this behavior is OPTIONAL.

Further, NeXT applications are free to use the "other" button in any way they
see fit.

> But for a long time, I've heard the NeXT 
> mouse referred to as a 2-button 1-button mouse :-) I havn't actually seen (used)
> a program that actually defines the 2nd mouse button in NeXTSTEP

QED.

>>Apple studied the use of proportional scroll bars. They found that they
>>were NOT intuitive. They confused users. They did this through expensive
>>user testing, not some survey of technogeeks.
> 
> Not intuitive!? That's one of the best things to do to a scroll bar! 

You can react with outrage all you want. But Apple actually sat down with
users and TESTED the damn thing.

You may think it is really cool to have all that information in front of
you like that, but the TESTS show that it confused users. It is NOT 
intuitive. Cool, perhaps. Intuitive, no.

-- 
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: rau@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Drivvt)
Subject: .mods on the .mac II : the wrath of 68000
Organization: Menzoberranzan Computer Networking 
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:14:12 GMT

A big thank-you to everybody who replied to my eariler post, directing me to
SoundTrecker.  Now, is there in the infinite vastness of the universe a similar
program which will run on a 68000 (I know, "Wowsers!  Does anyone still _use_
one of those?!")?  Also, a .mod editor/creator?  Thanx!

	Oh, yeah.  I advocate the Mac.  The Mac is Great.  Use a Mac.

-- 
Drivvt Daermon N'a'shezbaernon (Drow)   /\ Utah Saints? You mean Mormons, right?
Menzoberranzan  Computer  Networking /\/' \ Live for CPU time, die for CPU time.
rau@ucsu.colorado.edu               /' \'' \ Where would I be without IBM? InSoc
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ n''''' \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: cosc184z@menudo.uh.edu (David Alten)
Subject: Re: Question about IIvx, P600, Duo & displays
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 05:51:39 GMT

ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:
>oscar@mi.el.utwente.nl (Oscar ter Hofstede - UT) writes:
>>Hi!
>>I have read the announcements from Apple about the new macs, but there
>>are still a few questions open to me.
>>Can anyone fill in this table for me for each of the following machines?
>>	- IIvx
>>	- Performa 600
>>	- Powerbook Duo
>
>>CPU	68030 / 32 MHz		?
>In the IIvx and Performa 600.  The Duo 230 has a 33 Mhz 68030
>
>>FPU	68882 / 32 MHz		?
>Only IIvx.
>
>>External Bus width:	32 bits	?
>All 3.

Actually, doesn't the Performa 600 have a 16 bit bus??  I remember reading it
in Byte.

>>External Cache size:	32K	?
>Only IIvx
>
>>Also, Apple announced two new 14" displays, while I have only seen
>>the price of one of them. Which price goes with wich display?
>>And while I'm at it, what's the price of the 16" display?
>>Finally I'd like to know if the Duo comes with a active cristal display,
>>for less submarining :)
>
>The Duo systems come with a supertwist LCD.  Apple has three "new"
>monitors.  The Performa Display and the Performa Display Plus are worse
>than the standard Apple 13" RGB, but are cheaper.  The Mac Color Display
>replaces the current 13" and costs slightly less, with slightly better
>quality.

-- 
David Alten
cosc184z@menudo.uh.edu
HE KUER!!