Article View: comp.sys.next.hardware
Article #124Re: OD vs ADB, no contest
From: Maurice Shihadi
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1992 19:08
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1992 19:08
21 lines
1475 bytes
1475 bytes
I was just curious but at a meeting the other day at MOST Inc. I had the opportunity to ask why they didn't solicit NeXT as an OEM two years ago when they developed the first 128 3.5' read/write optical. I was told that NeXT evaluated the unit and strongly rejected it only no one seems to know exactly why. Now, two years later the 128 Optical is catching on quite nicely while the 256 meg Optical is slowly replacing it. So one more time, why didn't NeXT move forward on technology that improves on an idea that has allready been introduced to the NeXT community? Furthermore, why was the 128 optical rejected as an OEM consideration? I was really hopeing that the NeXTstation's would someday have an internal optical 3.5' disc. After all, the MOST optical specification is at 3.5' half height etc. If NeXT were to become interested again I'd give them my evaluation unit without hesitation plus a contact person at MOST that I'm constantly feeding NeXT literature too. Just a thought. maurices
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Bx02IH.L9D@spock.dis.cccd.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!news!news.cccd.edu!mauricesReferences:
<BwuIGA.E2@atherton.com> <1992Oct30.091849.29545@gagetalker.com> <1992Oct31.075745.4147@utstat.uucp>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!news!news.cccd.edu!maurices From: maurices@spock.dis.cccd.edu (Maurice Shihadi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.hardware Subject: Re: OD vs ADB, no contest Message-ID: <Bx02IH.L9D@spock.dis.cccd.edu> Date: 31 Oct 92 19:08:41 GMT References: <BwuIGA.E2@atherton.com> <1992Oct30.091849.29545@gagetalker.com> <1992Oct31.075745.4147@utstat.uucp> Organization: Coast Community College District, Costa Mesa, CA Lines: 21