HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: andrew@cubetech.com
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:28:55 GMT

In article <ewright.721341599@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>>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, 
>
>"Best" is a highly subjective term.  The best word processor for
>a screenwriter may not be the best for a scientist or a lawyer 
>or a poet or a programmer or a secretary or....

...and I have yet to see NeXT market their computer as "Best" for more
than one or two markets at a time.


andrew

actuall, if you want to get down to it, NeXT doesn't seem to do a lot
of 'marketing' at all, but that's a different thread.
-- 
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: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 05:40:39 GMT

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.
>--
>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>

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


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: dsletten@netcom.com (Dan Sletten)
Subject: Re: System 7 utilities needed
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:20:38 GMT

To hide the current app quickly, try option-clicking outside of its windows.

Dan

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:43:10 GMT

In article <16897EB1E.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.164523.3335@cuug.ab.ca>
>wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100) writes:
>>Oddly enough, the only thing I do on my machine that would really
>>benefit from color is looking at pictures. Word processing, software
>>development, spreadsheets, math... don't need color (unless you want
>>Quicktime in your essay paper. What a joke.)
>>
>So you only develop b&w software? Doesn't that limit your potential
>market?
> 
Of course. My inability to write games limits my market even more.
My inability to speak any language other than English really limits my
market. The point I'm making is that the software I use or create 
doesn't need color to do its job well. I hate gratuitous color use,
especially in menus and windows (esp. Windows).

Terry Wilcox
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
From: wilcoxt@cuug.ab.ca (Terrance Wilcox 260-8100)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:04:54 GMT

In article <ewright.721341599@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>Nonsense.  Just because most people only use one word processor,
>that doesn't mean they all use (or should use) the *same* word
>processor.  Having a greater number of programs to choose from
>makes it easier to find one that fits *your* needs, not some
>hypothetical average user's.
>
>"Best" is a highly subjective term.  The best word processor for
>a screenwriter may not be the best for a scientist or a lawyer 
>or a poet or a programmer or a secretary or....
>
>

Let's change 'word processor' to 'computer' here. Looks like
you agree that the Mac isn't the computer for everybody. I certainly
agree that the NeXT isn't the computer for everybody, but I'm an 
elitist at heart :).

Terry Wilcox

Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.advocacy:2457 comp.sys.amiga.advocacy:28850
From: doctor@k9.UUCP (Paul Broe)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: EGGPLANT, IMPLANT, EMPATH, BLAZEPLANT...
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:58:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: k9.doctor.055n
Organization: Mostly Harmless...
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16g (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith

In article <torrie.721468352@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> torrie@cs.stanford.edu (Evan Torrie) writes:
> dtiberio@csws20.ic.sunysb.edu (David Tiberio) writes:
> 
> >	NONE OF THE ABOVE.
> >	EMPLANT = DEATH OF HIGH PRICED MACINTOSH.
> >	FULL MACINTOSH QUADRA SYSTEMS FOR UNDER $4,000.
> 
>   Hmmm.  Look at my price list
> 
> M5921LL/A Macintosh Quadra 700 4MB RAM             $3227.00
> 
> Been there, done that.

What size monitor? What type of keyboard? What size of hard disk? :-)

-- 
----
Paul Broe
Internet: broe@plains.nodak.edu
UUCP: uunet!plains!prototype!k9!doctor (My Amiga 2500/20)    AmigaUUCP 1.16D
BIX: pbroe Compu$erve: too expensive.                        AmigaOS 2.05
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: prices@cgrb.orst.edu (STEVE PRICE)
Subject: SHOULD I BUY A IIVX?
Summary: SHOULD I BUY A IIVX?
Keywords: IIVX
Organization: Biological Computing Consortium, Oregon State University
Distribution: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:48:44 GMT

Maybe someone out there can help me. I'm about to purchase my first
computer and I really love the Mac. I've had my eye on the IIvx since I saw 
it at a computer fair here at school. I thought that it would be a good 
computer to buy because it is supposed to be fast, has room to expand, and 
with the university discount it is less expensive than for other mortals 
outside the school. I planned to get the new 14" Apple monnitor also which 
would bring the total up to 3,095 big buckaroos. Now I read stuff in this 
newsgroup that leads me to believe that it  is not such a hot computer (i.e. 
it is slow, it is crippled by a mismatched bus, etc. etc.) I've also heard 
about the supposed release of '040 computers in Feb. but I would hate to 
wait that long and find out they suck or are too rich for my taste as I am 
about at the edge of my budgetary envelope. Please could some person or 
people help me in clearing this mess? Should I go for it or what?

schuettm@ucs.orst.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern)
Subject: Re: the NeXT option (Was Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT)
Organization: Cube Technologies, Inc.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 05:25:58 GMT

In article <jak1=sl@rpi.edu> johnsd2@rpi.edu writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.121308.4320@cubetech.com>, andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes:
>|> NO!  Excuse me from using the term thread.  I am used to using threads
>|> on Mach.  On Mach, everything is a thread, and threads are grouped
>|> into processes (where they share the same address space among other
>|> things), and they are the base unit of the task scheduler.  They are
>|> all premptively scheduled.  The situation which you describe is SunOS
>|> (?)  where each task is scheduled, and the threads (a.k.a. lightweight
>|> processes on SunOS) co-operatively schedule themselves within the
>|> task's time-slice. This is not the same situation to which I am
>|> referring.  Therefore I will stop using the term threads.
>
>So on SOME systems threads a co-operatively multitasked within a processes,
>but in others they are just processes (but they share memory spaces
>with other processes)

No, they are different from processes with shared memory.  They are
threads.  They are basically multiple paths of execution within the
same process.  Since you must be executing something in a process, all
processes have at least one thread of execution.

>|> Here is a good example of using something like cthread_yield in a
>|> preemptive multitasking system:
>|> 
>|> while(1)
>|> {
>|>   if(check_something())
>|>     {
>|>       do something;
>|>     }
>|>   cthread_yield();
>|> }
>|> 
>|> 
>|> Now, if you remove "chthread_yield()," you will run in a very tight
>|> loop (if check_something() returns false often) and chew up a lot of
>|> CPU time, but since the system is preemptive, other tasks will still
>|> run (but a tight loop like this still chews up a lot of CPU).
>|> cthread_yield() tells the system "go ahead and let other stuff run
>|> now" an every turn of the loop instead of looping until it used it's
>|> time slice (which, on a fast processor, could be several hundred or
>|> thousands of loops).
>
>It looks like in this case cthread_yield will make this loop
>switch out much, much more often than it otherwise would have. Why
>is this necessary? The thread should be pre-empted during the loop,
>regardless of what its doing, right?

Yes, but a time-slice is usually pretty big.  That assuming
check_something() was always false, that would be a really tight loop
and would loop several hundred if not thousands of times before it was
switched out.  In this case you don't need it to do that, so on every
loop it asks to be switched out early.  It also burns a LOT more CPU
as the scheduler gives more resources to it.

I don't use yield functions very often at all, they are just there if
you want them.  You don't have to use them.


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: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:01:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.152700.20818@pellns.alleg.edu> smytonj@murr13.alleg.edu (James Smyton) writes:
>
>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)

As opposed to the Mac Quadra I suppos

Do the Quadras still have to turn off the cache to run software?

Terry Wilcox
From: justin@aix3090b.uky.edu (Justin P Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Software prices/availability
Keywords: software prices next mac dos
Date: 11 Nov 92 11:01:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: aix3090b.justin.721479719
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
X-Path: justin

Terry Wilcox writes:

>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.

And Word 5.1 for the Mac doesn't take up anywhere NEAR the space Word
for Windows 2.0 demands for a full installation.. Following along with that
thought, everything I have and use on my Mac combined doesn't take up 
nearly as much space as a full NeXTstep 3.0 install.. :)

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

That would make sense, except for one little snag: Mac software is generally
CHEAPER than DOS software.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: raist@rmece02.upr.clu.edu (Ricardo Hernandez | 802-36-4453)
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!)
Organization: UPR-Mayaguez--ASEL Lab
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 23:31:13 GMT

In article <BxBKoM.ByJ@javelin.sim.es.com>, mmunson@animal.es.com (Mark Munson) writes:
[stuff deleted]

|> MM> If you can't affort it, then you'll have to settle for an Amiga.
|> 
|> BF> Cut the "holier-than-thou" crap, please. Here you are blatently saying that
|> BF> the Amiga is inferior. Yet, a few lines down, you say "I'm not trying to
|> BF> supress the amiga". Bullsh*t. It's one thing to advocate a computer, but
|> BF> you're looking to start a flame war which I refuse to take part in.
|> 
|> The Mac offers more, and they can charge more for it.  If you don't have
|> the funds, you'll have to look at an Amiga (or an inexpensive PC clone).
|> The Amiga is great for many video intensive uses and I would advocate it
|> for user who are interested in these areas.  Happy now?

   "The Mac offers more..."  How subjective.  I guess we can debate that
over Colors, Architecture (25 DMA channels on the Amiga), Graphics
Coprocessor, Better sound, excellent OS, etc.  What's the price on a 
Classic II with 2 megs and a hardisk and with what it comes with?


|> MM> And if this weren't enough, the Amiga is poorly crafted.  The Amiga has a
|> MM> lot of good components, but they are all housed in a flimsy case that
|> MM> doesn't fit together well.  The keyboard feels cheap, and the mouse is even
|> MM> cheaper.  This  type of quality gives the Amiga a bad rap, and it seems to
|> MM> be indicative of the overall system quality.  Poor quality keeps serious
|> MM> users away, which it too bad, since the Amiga needs more market acceptance
|> MM> before good applications will show up for it.
|> 
|> BF> Ok, here we have another load of bull. What amigas have you used? A 6-year
|> BF> old A1000? What case doesn't fit together well? A500? A600? A1000? A1200?
|> BF> A2000? A2500? A3000? A3000T? A4000? You are putting the low and high end
|> BF> machines in the same class. [rest of paragraph deleted for space]
|> 
|> Now that you mention it, the 1000 did have a really cheap plastic case.  In
|> fact, the keyboard and mouse were really cheap feeling also.  But let's look
|> at the 3000 for a more current example.  The case is an improvement over the
|> 1000, but the plastic front panel doesn't fit the case well.  The drive
|> ports on the front of the case don't fit standard 5.25" mechanisms well.
|> As a result, the machine has a poorly crafted look.

   I don't think so.  I have used 5 A3000's so far, and all five look 
"workstation quality."

|> BTW: Mac II keyboards are an option.  You are free to purchase any third
|> party keyboard or input pointing device that makes you happy.  If you
|> feel that the mouse is unresponsive, the control panel will let you change
|> the speed and click-rate parameters to suit you preferences.

   Can we say, more expensive? (Mac II keyboards) :-|

[stuff deleted]

|> 
|> [MGM]
|> 

- Raist

Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: lsr@taligent.com (Larry Rosenstein)
Subject: Re: Macintosh advocacy (really!) SCROLL BARS
Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Organization: Taligent, Inc.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 01:14:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.192028.22300@news.Hawaii.Edu>,
guiyu@spectra.eng.hawaii.edu (The Big Color Wolf) wrote:
> 
> The scroll bars scrolls the window REAL-TIME! i.e. When you HOLD the scroll bar
> WHILE moving, the contents of the window MOVE at the SAME time.
> 

> CANNOT be incoporated into the MAC OS? 

There's nothing in the Mac that prevents you from doing this, although it
is more work.  I even wrote a simple hack that simulates this with existing
apps.  It works OK, although as others have pointed out, the effectiveness
depends on how fast the app can redraw the window.  Also, it has a few bugs
that I never got a chance to work out.

Larry Rosenstein
Taligent, Inc.

lsr@taligent.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ttn@cs.tut.fi (Tero Nieminen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Strange needs (who might need an 040)
Date: 13 Nov 92 12:41:50
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland.
Distribution: world
	<1992Nov11.154820.1142@yvax.byu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kaarne.cs.tut.fi
In-reply-to: feijai@endor.byu.edu's message of 11 Nov 92 15:48:20 -0700

In article <1992Nov11.154820.1142@yvax.byu.edu> feijai@endor.byu.edu (Sean Luke) writes:

   In some article Tero Nieminen wrote:
   >
   >And if you need real power, you are selecting from the wrong machines in
   >the first place.


   Well, yes, but not all of us can cough up the money for a Cray.  :-)

I wasn't suggesting that. But if you really are looking for power you
really should forget Macs and NeXT's and PC's alltogether and have a
look at machines like HP HP-PA architecture or DEC alpha line. Not all
of those cost an arm and leg like the Cray. For example the slowest DEC
Alpha (clock speed 133 MHz) costs under $10000 for universities which
is about twice the price of a non edu Mac Qaudra 700, and produces more
than six times the speed of the Mac. Go figure yourself..
-- 
         Tero Nieminen                      DANGER!
         ttn@cs.tut.fi                   Computer Bytes!
From: ovrskeek@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (I am the OVER-skeek!)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: 5 Nov 1992 00:38:37 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:

>Expensive?  Nonsense.  You can score a 24-bit graphics board, with
>acceleration, for under $400 -- retail.  If NeXT can't do as well,
>everyone in purchasing ought to be fired.

What good does a $400.00 24 bit card do you without a monitor? You
are missing the point here.

>A monochrome monitor is useful for perhaps 20% of the things that
>a computer can do today.  That makes the monochrome NeXTstation 1/5 
>of a computer -- a (much) faster version of the Mac Classic with a
>large screen.

You are making yourself look bad here. Is a mac classic only good for
1/5 of the things a computer can do today?

>Renderman, however, is one of the few remaining advantages that NeXT
>has.  Apple will soon negate the advantage of Display Postscript with
>Quickdraw GX.  NeXT has promoted its objected-oriented programming and
>development tools, but those are no longer unique.  You can get MacApp,
>TCL, AppMaker, Marksman, etc. on the Mac -- at a fraction of the cost.
>NeXT programmers say, "there's no comparison, NeXTstep is so much better,"
>but they're never able to say *how*.  Display Renderman, on the other
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I posted a nice list already! Do you read news? I did not recieve a
reply from you regarding the points I made, perhaps it is YOU who
are unable to say *how* a mac is comparable!

MacApp, TCL, AppMaker, Marksman, these all cost money. The NeXT developement
system is *FREE* to all (current) NeXTStep owners. I am not sure how it
is that $100-$300 became less expensive than free.

Have you even used the programming tools you talk about? Can you name
*one* area that they are superior to the NeXT? (They are better in some
places, but not many) Can you do it personally? Or have you just been
shooting your mouth off, without having actually used both systems.

I challenge you. See if you can do it.

------------------
ovrskeek@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
From: ibhan@husc10.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:27:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc10.ibhan.721067252

rob@hobbes.cuc.ab.CA (Rob Parkhill) writes:

>ACK! If you want colour, how about a NeXTstation Turbo Color
>machine?  Even with the 21" Monitor it's less than a Quadra.

I'm not sure about that.  I can get a Quadra 700 for about $3100 without a
HD, but with 4 MB of RAM.  A 200 Mb HD would run me, what, $500?  Add $400
to take it up to $4000.  Add VRAM and a 17" monitor to take it up to
$1100.  Now for $5100 you've got a Quadra system with a 200 MB HD and 20
MB of RAM and 24-bit color.  Though the NeXT has some nifty built in
features, they don't have the Quadra's slots (except for the Cube), so
they're pretty even in that sense.  Can you get a NeXTStation color for
$5100?  These are edu prices.  I have MIT's edu prices for the NeXT, and
the Quadra still comes out ahead. 
-- 
             --      Ishir Bhan (ibhan@husc.harvard.edu)      --
From: bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Trepidations of a stoned Mac user
Date: 12 Nov 92 17:52:19 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <jna15bh@rpi.edu>, johnsd2@jec322.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
> Someone wrote:
> |> OS/2 is made for machines with an Intel 80286 or higher and not for older
> |> Intel processors. System 7.x is made for Motorola 68000 or higher processors
> |> and can't be used with older Motorola processors like the 6502.
> 
> That's true. However, nobody is claiming the 68000 machines and
> the 6502 machines to be compatible.

Not to mention the fact that Motorola never made the 6502.... <grin>

-- 
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: tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: specifically comparing NeXT with Mac...
Organization: University of Washington School of Law, Class of '95
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:47:51 GMT

smytonj@carr54.alleg.edu (James Smyton) writes:
>From what I have seen(note this qualification), the Mac has a much larger  
>software selection compared to NeXTs.  How is NeXTs selling point  
>justified by software in leiu of this difference?

How many word processors do you use?  How many spreadsheets?  How many
data bases?  How many symbolic mathematics systems?  If the answer for
each of these is 1 or 2, then you have your answer.

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.

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).

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu (Garance A. Drosehn)
Subject: Re: Sculley considered for Clinton's Sec. of Commerce
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 17:44:29 GMT

UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
> fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars Peter Fischer) writes:
> >>>>>> "Erno" == Erno Pena (erno@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu)
> >
> >Erno> I think [Sculley would] be an OK Secretary of Commerce, but I'd
> >Erno> rather see Clinton choose Ross Perot instead.
> >
> >Of course. Perot is a NeXT man, so it's obvious he has a much better
> >understanding of what this technology is all about.
>
> 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...

Perot did not pull his money out of NeXT, he quit from their board of  
directors (or some kind of official position) in order to pursue "other  
interests".  He did this just a short time before throwing his hat into the  
presidential race, so it should be pretty obvious what those other interests  
were.

--
Garance Alistair Drosehn     =     gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
ITS Systems Programmer            (handles NeXT-type mail)
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute;           Troy NY    USA