🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1688C13CE0.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu>  
UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
> Did I miss something or did BYTE make it sound like the vendors got to  
submit
> the machine used in the test. They mades several references to this. One  
was
> something like 'Commodore declined participation, citing the Amiga's
> multimedia orientation' etc. They even said that the machine they got  
had
> an inadequate HD, and they had to provide an extra one.
> This one might not be BTE's fault...
>  

No? I would think that to make a fair comparison, the reviewer should  
request machines in similar configurations - that's the only way to truly  
level the playing field. There are some worse magazines than Byte that  
seem to be able to round up LOTS of machines with similar configurations. 

It could be argued that NeXT should have chosen to send them an ND with  
64meg of RAM and an external 1.2gig drive but ya never know what Byte told  
them the machine would be used for. It's common for magazines of Byte's  
stature to have semi-permanent loaners on hand. I haven't seen the article  
so I can't say for sure, but I would guess that there was shaky  
communication between Byte and NeXT.

If memory serves, the previous product comparison concluded that the NeXT  
had weak high-end graphics potential because it took longer to render a  
page in WordPerfect than some other machines did. Clearly the best example  
of Display PostScript at it's finest...


Gordon
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------