Talk:NeXT Computer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Apple Inc. (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


give us some more information

Was this the First RW CD on a Computer[edit]

I believe that this was the first commercial computer to be produced with a built-in Read/Write CD. does anyone have a reference for this? Also it's worth noting that the CD was very unreliable. OldCodger2 (talk) 04:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

To be pedantic, the NeXT used a MO drive, which was a different type of media to the later CD-RW drives. I believe it was the first application of the MO technology, but I don't have references to hand. Regards, Letdorf (talk) 22:25, 19 June 2012 (UTC).

October 2015 edits[edit]

The edits over the last few days have been adding interesting information, but have been unsourced and reference "spooky" information that an unspecified "we" are adding. Unfortunately, the state these edits are leaving the live article in is confusing and unencyclopedic. These edits need to be compiled in a sandbox, and presented whole into the article when complete. Given the nature of the information added, it should be reviewed by experienced editors before inclusion. ScrpIronIV 13:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


This article should be written in the PAST tense, consistent with every other article on Wikipedia about a long-obsolete computer such as the Three Rivers Computer Company "Perq"

This article needs editing and is written in very bad style. For example, there is a lot of talk without any actual sources. Also many errors on it. I'm surprised that nobody has noticed this yet. Thedidac (talk) 21:05, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Actually, if you look above, you will find it has been questioned. Trouble was, the contributor in question was willing to edit war over it. I was not. ScrpIronIV