Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!rodan!jfbruno
From: jfbruno@rodan.acs.syr.edu (John Bruno)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: "DOS machines" (Was: TT (Who has one?))
Message-ID: <4093@rodan.acs.syr.edu>
Date: 31 Jul 90 15:42:05 GMT
References: <1990Jul19.160526.2215@arcsun.arc.ab.ca> <6764@vax1.acs.udel.EDU> <692@cvbnetPrime.COM> <1990Jul27.022748.29262@math.lsa.umich.edu> <704@cvbnetPrime.COM> <32281@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: jfbruno@rodan.acs.syr.edu (John Bruno)
Followup-To: comp.misc
Organization: Integrated Healthcare Technologies, Inc.
Lines: 58

In article <32281@cup.portal.com> Bob_BobR_Retelle@cup.portal.com writes:
>Jerry Shekhel asks:
>>Hmmm.  This is exactly what I'm trying to figure out -- what makes
>>you hate the Intel processor so much?
> 
>This is something that in other circles would be politely called "chauvinism"
>or more impolitely, "bigotry"..

The newer Intel CPUs aren't too bad, the problem is that over 99% of the 
software available doesn't use the 80x86 to its fullest.  Virtually all 
software still has the limitations of the 8086 so that it will run on those
dinosaurs.  This is why you hear people saying that Intel chips suck, because
all of that segmented register garbage and the 640K "barrier" are still there.
Yeah, I know, "but you can run Unix or, or or (whine whine)..." you're talking
about less than 1% of the IBMmers out there, everyone still runs DOS. Maybe 
Windows will change that, we'll see.  I won't even talk about Extended memory
Expanded memory, CGA, EGA, HGC, MDA, VGA, Super VGA, MCGA, etc.  Software 
houses have to address a lot of these different "standards" if they want
their software to sell. It's a pain, it makes the software more expensive, etc.
Are you starting to get the picture yet?
 
>It doesn't really matter in the bigger sense of the world, since the company
>which uses Intel chips to make computers (IBM)

Gee, I thought other companies used these too?! But there is only one
prevailing architecture for them all, IBM's.  IBM could have released dog shit
with an attached keyboard and monitor back in (1981 was it??) and all of the
same people would now be screaming about how great the "standard" is.  There
are people that buy things from them just because they are big, no matter what
the product is.

>seems to have a good idea of
>where they're going, and how to get there, 

Yeah, SURE they do.

>while the company which uses
>Motorola chips (Atari,Corp) is run by amateurs, interested only in the 
>shortest term profit possible.

Commodore, Atari, and Apple all use 680x0 chips.  Just what is your point here,
though? Are you saying that IBM isn't interested in a short term profit? If
there's anyone showing "bigotry" here.......
 
>In the long run, it's not going to matter which CPU chip is more capable,
>as it is which company knows what it's doing...

Exactly. It's attitudes like that that keep "Big Blue" in the "Big Black".

> 
>BobR

---jb 

PS - The main reason I posted this is to re-direct follow-ups to comp.misc.
      
    "I was unprepared for his attack.
     I instinctively used the Vulcan Death Grip" -- Spock