Aren't you missing the point? It has nothing to do with the relative merits of NeXT vs. Beats. It's only mentioning that when Apple acquired NeXT, Apple's very existence was on the line - it spent 15% of the entire worth of Apple on NeXT. Apple was crumbling at that point, and bet it all on Steve Jobs and a radically new operating system. Big risk, but big reward. The Beats buy, on the other hand, is merely a blip in Apple's finances. That's all the article says.