Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!mephisto!rutgers!att!cbnewsh!wolf
From: wolf@cbnewsh.att.com (thomas.wolf)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: "DOS machines" (Was: TT (Who has one?))
Message-ID: <1990Jul27.140916.3387@cbnewsh.att.com>
Date: 27 Jul 90 14:09:16 GMT
References: <6764@vax1.acs.udel.EDU> <692@cvbnetPrime.COM> <1990Jul27.022748.29262@math.lsa.umich.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 80


*** Flame On.  Get that fire extinguisher out of my way :-) ***
In article <1990Jul27.022748.29262@math.lsa.umich.edu> hyc@math.lsa.umich.edu (Howard Chu) writes:
>
>I tend to call 'em DOS machines or 8086 boxes. (Or pieces of *Shit* but that's
>not important right now...  }-) 
>
>I object to corporations like IBM taking generic language and turning it into
>trademark status nomenclature. Used to be "PC" meant any personal computer.
>The IBM PC wasn't even personable, let alone personal, at its introduction,
>and has only slightly improved since. Nowadays you don't hear people saying
>"personal computer" very much. I tend to say "micros," "minis," "mainframes,"
>and "supers." If you want to talk about generic microcomputers, you can't say
>"PC" any more. (Very sharp of IBM's marketing staff, I must say. But just
>'cause it was obviously a smart move doesn't mean I have to like it. Just like
>Sun calling their dreg of a system NFS. How generic-sounding. Bah...)

I totally disagree with everything said so far.  First of all, I don't recall
anyone using the word "personal computer" before the IBM PC came out.  Back
then, people used the words "micro".  Now, when people (at least the ones
I know) talk about PCs they mean personal computers.  Hardly anyone
uses the words "micro", "mini", "mainframe", etc. anymore since these terms
are becoming virtually useless in a world where more and more personal
computers have the power of what used to be mainframes (my long-winded way
of saying that the boundry lines between categories are becoming fuzzy, whereas
personal computer still means exactly what it did 10 years ago)...I'm saying
that exactly the opposite of what the author claims is actually the case.

Furthermore, when you call Suns "system" a "dreg", what exactly do you base
your statement on?  First off, their _system_ is called "SunOS".  Their
Network-based FILE System, NFS (taken in context, it doesn't sound so 
"generic"), is a fairly advanced system, considering that
it was available on Suns when others were still having problems getting a
simple non-networked file system to work (I'm not saying it is perfect, but
it is definitely not the "dreg" the author claims.)


>
>Pretty much. I personally loathe current Intel chips. I don't care what you
>can do with one, a different architecture can do it better. 

Is this statement made out of intimate knowledge or out of ignorance?
If it is the former, you must certainly have worked much with the line of Intel
chips to form this opinion - how do you reconcile your working on machines
with these chips when you loathe them so much?
If it's the latter, you're you're just filling the net with useless chatter.

Your statement "I don't care what you can do with one, a different
architecture can do it better" is about as useless a statement as "I don't
care what number you name, I can name one that is larger".

[deleted text]
>
>I think there's more to the TT than meets the eye.

That's just the point!  So far, nothing meets the eye (at least not in
mass production :-)  Again, "the computer I plan to release probably is better
than the one you currently have on your desk."

[deleted text]

>Look at their price/performance ratio. Look at IBM operating systems. They're
>the standard in the IBM mainframe world...
How ingenious a statement.  Like saying UNIX is the standard on UNIX machines.

[...other statements deleted....]

[at the end, some apologetic statements about getting carried away]
"Sorry, officer, I didn't mean to commit murder.  I just tend to get
carried away!"

*** Flame off ***

Tom

-- 
+-------------------------------------+ "Stupid" questions are better than
| Tom Wolf      | (201) 949-2079      | no questions at all. No answer is
| Bell Labs, NJ | wolf@spanky.att.com | better than a stupid one.
+-------------------------------------+