Re: Business Week article (NeXT to dump hardware)

Thread View: comp.sys.next.misc

3 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

3 total messages Started by Michael McCulloch Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:47

#4879

Author: Michael McCulloch
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 15:47

17 lines
1104 bytes

In article <C1I5xq.BGB@utstat.toronto.edu>, philip@utstat.toronto.edu
Philip McDunnough wrote:
>
>I'm not saying that NS486 will fail. It will sell as a niche product. However,
>it would be foolish for NeXT to give up making hardware and to become a
>software vendor. That would really be the final straw.
> 
>There's no reason to stop making NeXT hardware. 
> 

No reason other than market share, profit margin, and sales volume. I
would think that selling a shrink-wrapped OS would be less capital
intensive and offer more margin in the long run than producing HW.
Of course, _I_ don't own/run a company that does either. :-)

Michael McCulloch
Huntsville, AL

Re: Business Week article (NeXT to dump hardware)

#4901

Author: Scott Byer
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:08

17 lines
1154 bytes

Should NeXT continue to make hardware?

Not sure.  But consider this:

Would PostScript have been as successful if Adobe had stuck to the
original plan and made printers?

It is extremely difficult to license OEMs for software.  If they
think you're competing with them, it's darn near impossible.

--
Scott Byer                             NeXTMail: byer@mv.us.adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated               These are *my* opinions, and  
1585 Charleston Road, P.O. Box 7900        do not necessarily reflect
Mountain View, CA 94039-7900             the opinions of my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Business Week article (NeXT to dump hardware)

#4897

Author: Philip McDunnough
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:55

34 lines
1886 bytes

In article <1993Jan28.190819.7151@adobe.com> byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer) writes:
>
>Should NeXT continue to make hardware?
>
>Not sure.  But consider this:
>
>Would PostScript have been as successful if Adobe had stuck to the
>original plan and made printers?

Didn't Apple own part of Adobe back then. In any case it's not as though
there was an alternative to Postscript printers.

Note that as soon as there was (PCL, True Type now) most printer sales went
to non Postscript printers.

In the true tradition of Apple and others, Adobe overcharged for owning 
a Postscript printer. Were it not for True Type and PCL they would still
be.

It's essential that NeXT continue to make hardware. I also find it somewhat 
disappointing that Adobe has given minimal support to the one platform that
went out on a limb with a complete Postscript based imaging model, but then
what else could one expect from Adobe? Even Windows is getting more attention.

Just an opinion, but I really wonder whether Adobe is in any moral position
to comment on these matters. It is a publically owned company that goes where
the market is. Fortunately it doesn't have a monopoly on the way we see things.
>
>It is extremely difficult to license OEMs for software.  If they
>think you're competing with them, it's darn near impossible.

Philip McDunnough
University of Toronto
philip@utstat.toronto.edu

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads